In the early 1940s, at a time when it was virtually impossible for a South African of color to secure a professional apprenticeship, the Jewish law firm Witkin, Sidelsky and Eidelman gave a young black man a job as a clerk.
It was among the first encounters in what would become a lifelong relationship between Nelson Mandela and South Africa’s bustling liberal Jewish community, impacting the statesman’s life at several defining moments — from his arrival in Johannesburg from the rural Transkei region as a young man to his years of struggle, imprisonment and ascension to the presidency.
Mandela, who died Thursday at 95, wrote of the early job in his autobiography, “Long Walk to Freedom,” and acknowledged the disproportionate role that Jews played in the struggle against apartheid. Lazer Sidelsky, one of the firm’s partners, treated him with “enormous kindness” and was among the first whites to treat him with respect.
“I have found Jews to be more broad-minded than most whites on issues of race and politics, perhaps because they themselves have historically been victims of prejudice,” Mandela wrote. When Nelson Mandela visited Israel in 1997 he specifically asked to meet , Lazer Sidelsky’s son, Rabbi Sodelsky. and Stephen Drus ( Stephen Darori after he Hebrewaized his surname ) the nephew of Professor Ethel Drus both of whom had immigrated to Israel in the 80′s . Rabbi Sidelsky for ideological Zionist reasons and Stephen Drus , ” I was the last of my family in South Africa and after been detained without trial repeatedly and hassled by the South African Security Police , I simply folded , gave up and joined the Struggle to Release Mandela, in the South African Diaspora”. Professor Ethel Drus, was a renown UCT Educated Historian, who won three Alexander Prizes for History awarded by the Royal Society of Historians ( the equivalent of the Fields Prize in Mathematics) . Professor Drus Chaired the Committee of Twelve who drafted the Freedom Charter , the Central African National Congress Document of commitment. The committee of Twelve consisted of Three Blacks ( Mandela, Tambo and Mathews ) and Nine Jewish Academics and Civil Rights Lawyers that included Ethel Drus, Ruth First, Abie Sachs, Joe Slovo ( Ruth’s First’s Husband) , the Bernsteins, Helen Joseph, and Helen Suzman). They agreed to disagree on the question of Nationalization and the Redistribution of Land that Oliver Tambo and Nelson Mandela felt appropriate for inclusion then but agreed to reevaluate their position in the future and after he became the first Black President, Nelson Mandela chose not to make either central to the philosophy he followed. Mandela here top Harry Oppenheimer ( born Jewish ) advice an rather than antagonize all the Whites and Indians pursued an affirmative action program while Harry Oppenheimer and other Jewish Business Leaders accelerated the transition of Blacks into Big Business in south Africa by adding them to the Board of directors of JSE companies and even giving them management control of major JSE Groups like JCI – Johannesburg Consolidated Investment. Stephen Drus was active in the Progress Federal Party that became the Progressive Federal Party in Parliament and the Official Opposition. It is the Democratic Alliance today . Stephen Drus served as both Chairman of the Progressive and then Progressive Federal Party Youth Organisation in both the Western Cape and then Nationally. He was a founder and treasurer of first the short lived Mass Democratic Movement ( banned) and then the United Democratic Front and was the financial connection between the UDF and major South African businessmen that included Harry Oppenheimer, Mendel Kaplan, Donald Gordon, Sol Kerzner , Susman of Woolworths, Ackerman of Ackermans , Mauberberger and many other leading Jewish businessman in Cape Town in particular. Professor Ethel Drus then Emeritus Professor of History at Southampton University in the United Kington who was an authority of South African banned organisations and the legislation that did so, instructed her nephew Stephen Drus to insist that no leadership was elected to the United Democratic Front. And so it was .Without leadership, the union of over 400 Anti Apartheid Organisations ( both large and small) that all called for the Release of Mandela , technically did not exists and could therefore not ne banned. And so it was. the UDF led the campaign thereafter for the Release of Mandela and then evolved into the grassroots organisation of the African National Congress after Nelson Mandela was released from the Victor Vester Prison on February 11th, 1990 at 2.30 pm.
The Democratic Alliance, the liberal opposition in the new South African Democracy Parliament was led by Tony Leon for thirteen years and currently by Helen Zille who has Jewish Grandfathers.
South Africa’s Jews remembered Mandela, the country’s first democratically elected president, as a close friend, one with deep ties to prominent community figures and a partner in the decades-long effort to end apartheid.
“I was extremely privileged to lead the community during his presidency,” said Mervyn Smith, who was chairman and later president of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, the community’s representative body. “We met with him on many occasions and the talk was direct and open.”
For Mandela, who rose to prominence as a leading opponent of the discriminatory racial regime known as apartheid, Jews were vital allies. Jewish lawyers represented him in multiple trials, and Jewish activists and political figures played leading roles in the fight.
But Mandela’s ties to prominent South African Jews were personal as well as political. The former president’s second marriage, to Winnie Madikizela in 1958, took place at the home of Ray Harmel, a Jewish anti-apartheid activist. Harmel made Winnie’s wedding dress at Mandela’s request, according to David Saks’ history “Jewish Memories of Mandela.”
When Mandela married again, in 1998, he invited Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris to offer a private blessing on the nuptials that were scheduled to take place on Shabbat.
“After a warm exchange of greetings, Rabbi Cyril spoke quietly to them and blessed them,” Cyril’s wife, Ann, wrote later. “They stood through the blessing holding hands and with eyes closed. One could almost imagine the huppah.”
Nelson Mandela salutes the crowd at the Green and Sea Point Hebrew Congregation in Cape Town on a visit shortly after being elected South Africa’s president in 1994. Joining Mandela, from left, are Rabbi Jack Steinhorn; Israel’s ambassador to South Africa, Alon Liel; Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris; and Mervyn Smith, chairman of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies. (SA Rochlin Archives, SAJBD)
Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was born in 1918 in the village of Mvezo, in the southeastern part of the country. As a young lawyer he was active in the African National Congress, which was beginning to challenge laws it considered unjust and discriminatory.
In the 1950s, Mandela was tried for treason. He was acquitted with the help of a defense team led by Israel Maisels. Several years later, when he was accused of attempting to overthrow the apartheid regime during the Rivonia Trial, Mandela was defended by several Jewish lawyers. On the flip side , Percy Yutar was the Senior Prosecutor of Mandela and other Rivonia Defendants .He later wrote in his biography that it was the most distasteful thing he had to do in his life. The Rivonia Far, where Nelson Mandela was hidden was owned by Arthur Goldreich .All the Rivonia Whites arrested with Mandela were the practicing Jews
The defence line-up for the majority of the accused was:
Chaskalson, Fischer, Hanson and Joffe were Jews. Bizos was a partner in a Jewish Law Firm and a family in Greece fought with Jewish Partisans in the Second World War. Three of his grandchildren have married into the Jewish Faith. Berrange was a founder of the South African communist Party with Bram Fischer who he met as a law student at the University of Cape Town.
Mandela was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison in 1964. He served most of his sentence on Robben Island, a former leper colony off the coast of Cape Town. The legendary, feisty Jewish parliamentarian Helen Suzman visited him there. Another prison visitor was the journalist Benjamin Pogrund, who worked frequently with Mandela in the 1960s.
In a 1986 visit at Pollsmoor Prison, Pogrund informed Mandela that his son would shortly be celebrating his bar mitzvah. Afterward, the boy received a personal note from the future president.
“From a man serving a life sentence — and at that stage with no idea when he might be released — it was a kind and thoughtful action for a youngster he had not even met,” Pogrund said, according to Saks.
Mandela was released after 27 years, in February 1990. Four years later he was elected president. Among his appointees was Arthur Chaskalson, a member of his defense team during the Rivonia Trial, as the first president of the new Constitutional Court; he later became chief justice. Abie Sachs who lost an eye and a arm in the parcel bomb that killed Ruth First in her Lorenzo Marques office was also appoint to this Court as a Justice.
Mandela’s deep ties to the Jewish community continued during his political career. On the first Shabbat after his election, he visited the Marais Road Synagogue in Sea Point.
“Almost his first celebration was with the Jewish community,” Smith told JTA.
In 1994, at the opening of an exhibition on Anne Frank, Mandela recounted how a handwritten version of her diary had inspired him and fellow prisoners on Robben Island.
On Israel, Mandela’s relationship with the Jewish community was not free of controversy. His African National Congress cultivated close ties with the Palestine Liberation Organization and Mandela warmly embraced its leader, Yasser Arafat. Qaddafi of Libya gave Mandela and the ANC , $100 million in 1991 and in giving lip service to that donation, Mandela’s relationship with the State of Israel was vacillated in ambivalence . Confronted with Jewish protests, Mandela was dismissive, insisting that his relations with other countries would be determined by their attitudes toward the liberation movement.
“If the truth alienates the powerful Jewish community in South Africa, that’s too bad,” Mandela was reported to have said, according to Gideon Shimoni, author of “Community and Conscience: The Jews in Apartheid South Africa.”
Shimoni also recounts a 1990 encounter at the University of the Witwatersrand with a Jewish student.
“Your enemies are not my enemies,” Mandela said.
According to Saks, Mandela stressed his respect for Israel’s right to exist even as he defended his relationships with Palestinian leaders. It was perhaps illustrative of his policy of inclusivity that Mandela accepted an honorary doctorate from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in 1997 when many in his party remained opposed to any ties with Israel.
On a visit to Israel in 1999, Mandela invited Harris to join him.
“He made us proud to be South Africans,” Smith said. “His presence at any communal occasion was electrifying. The Jewish
After serving as the first President of South Africa , Nelson Mandela retired Qunu , his ancestral home in the Transkei that had during his Presidency been redeveloped for the Nelson Mandela Foundation by Louis Karol Architects , a leading Jewish firm of Architects in Cape Town.
Nelson Mandela . The Giant of Moral Tolerance . Avery Great Man,died on Thurday , 5th December 2013. Rest In Peace Utata Madiba.
In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals. The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.
“The opposite of good is not evil, it is indifference.”
– Abraham Joshua Heschel
There is a growing sense that the ANC may be in the process of disintegration. Some assessments are based on electoral considerations, relating to the recent ANC setbacks. These do not spell out the causes and the wider social, political and even emotional meanings and consequences of the collapse of a movement that lived in the hearts and minds and homes of very many people. What are the reasons for thinking that the ANC may be collapsing or disintegrating?
It is important to understand what the ANC and the SACP to a significant extent represented to very many South Africans for at least 40 years, between 1950 and 1990. I specify these years because the ANC was not the hegemonic force within African nationalism that it later became for most of its first four decades, when it was overshadowed by the Garveyites and the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (ICU).
By the time the ANC became a hegemonic force in African nationalism and, increasingly for most anti-apartheid forces, it bound people on the basis of a range of factors. These included the exemplary leaders who inspired many people with a will to be free, and who trusted this leadership of the organisations – people like Chief Albert Luthuli, Dr Yusuf Dadoo, Walter and Albertina Sisulu, Lillian Ngoyi, Nelson Mandela, Bram Fischer, Ruth First, Chris Hani, Joe Slovo and many others.
People had a sense that the organisation grew over time. It faced adversity, but generally overcame its difficulties through evaluation of what had gone wrong and charted a course of action that made sense to many people. It learnt hard lessons and it changed and developed over time.
In the period to which I refer, the ANC was relatively self-reflective about its problems and tried to correct weaknesses it displayed. The most famous example of self-examination and reformulation of approaches may have been the 1969 consultative conference, held in Morogoro, Tanzania, whose strategy and tactics document is still quoted today.
This was at a time when the organisation confronted deep demoralisation among its members, notably MK soldiers who felt they were languishing in camps after the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns. There was also a sense of despair in the face of the apparent invincibility of the apartheid regime.
The conference charted a path forward, after soberly indicating points of vulnerability of the apartheid regime and strengths of the liberation forces that had received insufficient attention. This fresh evaluation inspired its cadres and also drew in many new people who believed that it was a viable way of launching a fresh assault against the apartheid regime.
In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense that people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals.
The SACP was also held in high esteem at the time: people sang praise songs about the organisation and its leaders. Unlike most communist parties in the world, many of which changed their names because they considered the words “Communist Party” to be discredited at that time, the SACP enjoyed great prestige. Because of its standing among the oppressed the SACP did not need to consider changing its name, because it was then associated with heroism and sacrifice. The SACP tied much of its political action to that of the ANC, a long-standing alliance. But it came to include linking its fortunes to the rise of and support for Jacob Zuma.
The ANC is in disarray and its future in doubt not simply by virtue of electoral setbacks but because it no longer commands respect as a bearer of values that people can respect. The factors that combine to pose a threat to the very existence of the organisation, at least as one that inspires people with values that promise to benefit its core constituency, include:
Killing an organisation by killing a dream
In the potential demise of the ANC one is not seeing wounds inflicted by the DA or the EFF in the main, but self-inflicted wounds. These wounds amount to killing what the ANC represented in the minds of many, becoming something very different from that which had previously drawn people to the organisation. It has become a “fat cat” organisation, as well as one that can no longer be trusted to be what it had previously meant for the oppressed. Indeed, it has come to be seen as one where its leaders look out for themselves at the expense of its core constituency, including at the cost of the lives of the most oppressed, as in Marikana.
Killing an organisation by rupturing the connection with its constituency
The organisation is no longer connected; it no longer has tight bonds with its core constituency, the poorest of the poor. This cannot simply be explained by Marxist categories like the embourgeoisement of the ANC or its succumbing to neoliberalism or accommodation with capital or representing the comprador bourgeoisie or similar Marxist or pseudo Marxist formulations. There may be such inclinations but we are talking about what Marxism cannot explain. People had been drawn into struggle often through seeing their parents humiliated under apartheid. The ANC and SACP took up their plight as their own and embodied their desire to be free as the very reason for their organisational existence. Today, in some instances, the ANC is party to humiliation of or is silent in the face of state violence against the people.
What we now have to explain is the rupturing of bonds of responsibility, solidarity, connection, care and many similar words that are not found or found in the same way in the language of Marxism. One can find assistance in feminist theology, feminism in general and various social scientists that care about the people they wish to help. One can also benefit from interrogating the emphasis that Rabbi Abraham Heschel, quoted at the beginning of this article, (who was a close comrade of Martin Luther King Jr), places on indifference to the wrongs done to others or their humiliation.
The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.
It is no longer moved by their plight. It is no longer affected by whether they sink or swim. They must now bear their pain without ANC support. Their pain is no longer that of the organisation, whose empathy and compassion had previously bound them together
Killing an organisation by killing compassion for the poor and oppressed
The words empathy, compassion and passion go beyond understanding theories of Marx, Lenin and Engels, though Marx does write with passion of his pain and outrage at the crushing of the Paris Commune, among other works . But Marxist teachings, per se, do not interrogate this subjective factor, which leads Marx, Engels and Lenin to care and feel for the poor and others not to do so. In fact, many contemporary Marxists, who may be very learned, may not see this as imposing any responsibility on themselves to act to remedy these wrongs. They may not see the need to join their fate with that of the oppressed. That requires a sense of connectedness, solidarity and responsibility in relation to the people who are still often landless or unemployed or harassed and evicted and arrested for no good cause.
Killing an organisation by stealing from the poor to further enrich the already rich
At an objective level, and flowing from no longer caring about the poor, the ANC has done worse. It has stolen from the poor to further enrich those who have recently become rich or others who have always been or have now become privileged. The level of betrayal that this comprises is another of the blows that it has inflicted on its constituency.
Killing an organisation by rupturing the trust that bound it to communities
People loved the ANC. It was their one great love that competed with no other love and the great leaders clearly loved the people whom they served: yes, served not in the discredited clichéd sense of “public service”, which really means personal benefit and enrichment.
Killing an organisation by making common cause with previous apartheid operatives
In order to settle scores with those opposing the current looting and violence, the present leadership of the ANC has not hesitated to make common cause with former apartheid operatives, like General Mthandazo Berning Ntlemeza, head of the Hawks, and suspended head of Crime Intelligence, General Richard Mdluli.
The ANC may not die. The Congress of India continues to exist, but is a shadow of its former self, lacking integrity and vision. That may be the fate of the ANC. It is said by some that this is the fate of all liberation movements after 20 years in power. But nothing is inevitable in politics and this need not have happened. It is possible, though unlikely, that the ANC will recover its previous standing. My belief is that it has gone too far along a route that is anti-people and tramples on the gains that the organisation itself inaugurated.
The democratic project now needs to be driven by forces beyond (but not necessarily identified as antagonistic to) the ANC. That requires building new organisations or reviving the role of those that already exist. It means building alliances, sometimes between those who have never previously been bound together. It requires a broad vision that can bring such a coalition of forces together and capture widespread support, in order to rescue and revive our democratic and emancipatory promise.
In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals. The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.
This article first appeared on Creamer Media’s website: polity.org.za
“The opposite of good is not evil, it is indifference.”
– Abraham Joshua Heschel
There is a growing sense that the ANC may be in the process of disintegration. Some assessments are based on electoral considerations, relating to the recent ANC setbacks. These do not spell out the causes and the wider social, political and even emotional meanings and consequences of the collapse of a movement that lived in the hearts and minds and homes of very many people. What are the reasons for thinking that the ANC may be collapsing or disintegrating?
It is important to understand what the ANC and the SACP to a significant extent represented to very many South Africans for at least 40 years, between 1950 and 1990. I specify these years because the ANC was not the hegemonic force within African nationalism that it later became for most of its first four decades, when it was overshadowed by the Garveyites and the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (ICU). (See Raymond Suttner “African Nationalism” in P Vale, L Hamilton and E H Prinsloo, Intellectual Traditions in South Africa, 2014).
By the time the ANC became a hegemonic force in African nationalism and, increasingly for most anti-apartheid forces, it bound people on the basis of a range of factors. These included the exemplary leaders who inspired many people with a will to be free, and who trusted this leadership of the organisations – people like Chief Albert Luthuli, Dr Yusuf Dadoo, Walter and Albertina Sisulu, Lillian Ngoyi, Nelson Mandela, Bram Fischer, Ruth First, Chris Hani, Joe Slovo and many others.
People had a sense that the organisation grew over time. It faced adversity, but generally overcame its difficulties through evaluation of what had gone wrong and charted a course of action that made sense to many people. It learnt hard lessons and it changed and developed over time.
In the period to which I refer, the ANC was relatively self-reflective about its problems and tried to correct weaknesses it displayed. The most famous example of self-examination and reformulation of approaches may have been the 1969 consultative conference, held in Morogoro, Tanzania, whose strategy and tactics document is still quoted today.
This was at a time when the organisation confronted deep demoralisation among its members, notably MK soldiers who felt they were languishing in camps after the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns. There was also a sense of despair in the face of the apparent invincibility of the apartheid regime.
The conference charted a path forward, after soberly indicating points of vulnerability of the apartheid regime and strengths of the liberation forces that had received insufficient attention. This fresh evaluation inspired its cadres and also drew in many new people who believed that it was a viable way of launching a fresh assault against the apartheid regime.
In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense that people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals.
The SACP was also held in high esteem at the time: people sang praise songs about the organisation and its leaders. Unlike most communist parties in the world, many of which changed their names because they considered the words “Communist Party” to be discredited at that time, the SACP enjoyed great prestige. Because of its standing among the oppressed the SACP did not need to consider changing its name, because it was then associated with heroism and sacrifice. The SACP tied much of its political action to that of the ANC, a long-standing alliance. But it came to include linking its fortunes to the rise of and support for Jacob Zuma.
The ANC is in disarray and its future in doubt not simply by virtue of electoral setbacks but because it no longer commands respect as a bearer of values that people can respect. The factors that combine to pose a threat to the very existence of the organisation, at least as one that inspires people with values that promise to benefit its core constituency, include:
Killing an organisation by killing a dream
In the potential demise of the ANC one is not seeing wounds inflicted by the DA or the EFF in the main, but self-inflicted wounds. These wounds amount to killing what the ANC represented in the minds of many, becoming something very different from that which had previously drawn people to the organisation. It has become a “fat cat” organisation, as well as one that can no longer be trusted to be what it had previously meant for the oppressed. Indeed, it has come to be seen as one where its leaders look out for themselves at the expense of its core constituency, including at the cost of the lives of the most oppressed, as in Marikana.
Killing an organisation by rupturing the connection with its constituency
The organisation is no longer connected; it no longer has tight bonds with its core constituency, the poorest of the poor. This cannot simply be explained by Marxist categories like the embourgeoisement of the ANC or its succumbing to neoliberalism or accommodation with capital or representing the comprador bourgeoisie or similar Marxist or pseudo Marxist formulations. There may be such inclinations but we are talking about what Marxism cannot explain. People had been drawn into struggle often through seeing their parents humiliated under apartheid. The ANC and SACP took up their plight as their own and embodied their desire to be free as the very reason for their organisational existence. Today, in some instances, the ANC is party to humiliation of or is silent in the face of state violence against the people.
What we now have to explain is the rupturing of bonds of responsibility, solidarity, connection, care and many similar words that are not found or found in the same way in the language of Marxism. One can find assistance in feminist theology, feminism in general and various social scientists that care about the people they wish to help. One can also benefit from interrogating the emphasis that Rabbi Abraham Heschel, quoted at the beginning of this article, (who was a close comrade of Martin Luther King Jr), places on indifference to the wrongs done to others or their humiliation.
The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.
It is no longer moved by their plight. It is no longer affected by whether they sink or swim. They must now bear their pain without ANC support. Their pain is no longer that of the organisation, whose empathy and compassion had previously bound them together
Killing an organisation by killing compassion for the poor and oppressed
The words empathy, compassion and passion go beyond understanding theories of Marx, Lenin and Engels, though Marx does write with passion of his pain and outrage at the crushing of the Paris Commune, among other works (See the conclusion to +The Civil War in France). But Marxist teachings, per se, do not interrogate this subjective factor, which leads Marx, Engels and Lenin to care and feel for the poor and others not to do so. In fact, many contemporary Marxists, who may be very learned, may not see this as imposing any responsibility on themselves to act to remedy these wrongs. They may not see the need to join their fate with that of the oppressed. That requires a sense of connectedness, solidarity and responsibility in relation to the people who are still often landless or unemployed or harassed and evicted and arrested for no good cause.
Killing an organisation by stealing from the poor to further enrich the already rich
At an objective level, and flowing from no longer caring about the poor, the ANC has done worse. It has stolen from the poor to further enrich those who have recently become rich or others who have always been or have now become privileged. The level of betrayal that this comprises is another of the blows that it has inflicted on its constituency.
Killing an organisation by rupturing the trust that bound it to communities
People loved the ANC. It was their one great love that competed with no other love and the great leaders clearly loved the people whom they served: yes, served not in the discredited clichéd sense of “public service”, which really means personal benefit and enrichment.
Killing an organisation by making common cause with previous apartheid operatives
In order to settle scores with those opposing the current looting and violence, the present leadership of the ANC has not hesitated to make common cause with former apartheid operatives, like General Mthandazo Berning Ntlemeza, head of the Hawks, and suspended head of Crime Intelligence, General Richard Mdluli.
The ANC may not die. The Congress of India continues to exist, but is a shadow of its former self, lacking integrity and vision. That may be the fate of the ANC. It is said by some that this is the fate of all liberation movements after 20 years in power. But nothing is inevitable in politics and this need not have happened. It is possible, though unlikely, that the ANC will recover its previous standing. My belief is that it has gone too far along a route that is anti-people and tramples on the gains that the organisation itself inaugurated.
The democratic project now needs to be driven by forces beyond (but not necessarily identified as antagonistic to) the ANC. That requires building new organisations or reviving the role of those that already exist. It means building alliances, sometimes between those who have never previously been bound together. It requires a broad vision that can bring such a coalition of forces together and capture widespread support, in order to rescue and revive our democratic and emancipatory promise.
Photo of Raymond Suttner by Ivor Markman.
Raymond Suttner is a scholar and political analyst. He is a former political prisoner for activities in the ANC-led liberation struggle. Currently he is a Part-time Professor attached to Rhodes University and an Emeritus Professor at Unisa. His most recent book is Recovering Democracy in South Africa (Jacana and Lynne Rienner, 2015). He blogs at raymondsuttner.com and his twitter handle is @raymondsuttner
Former president Kgalema Motlanthe has warned the ANC that if it did not get its house in order, it faced being irrelevant and would eventually die.
Motlanthe was speaking during a two-day regional consultative conference of the ANC at the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium in Port Elizabeth yesterday, where he addressed about 300 delegates on factionalism and renewal.
“Renewal cannot be just tampering with the structures. It means we must think very deeply about what the challenges are that our people face today. The ANC exists for one purpose only, and that is to address the problems of our people.
"If it [the ANC] is no longer addressing the problems of our people, we might as well begin writing the obituary of the ANC,” Motlanthe said.
He said it would not be the first time a glorious liberation movement lost its hegemony with the people, as this was what happened to other African countries’ liberation parties after they had been in power for 20 years.
Motlanthe said like empires and all living organisms, organisations also “rise and fall” because the rule of nature was that everything was in motion.
“Nothing is static. Nothing is permanent. That is why, when you are elected, you must understand that the platform of leadership that you have is not permanent.
"You serve in that capacity because members say so. Renewal must therefore be a function of understanding where we are, where we are heading to and what the challenges are,” he said.
For the 104-year-old ANC to continue to survive, it needed to adapt and have a long-term view to the future, as reliance on its struggle credentials was not enough for it to renew itself, said the former president.
“The minute we fail to adapt to the concrete conditions and the challenges of today, the organisation becomes irrelevant. And people realise they can continue with their lives and have progress without the ANC.
“That would be the end of [the ANC].”
As a governing party, the ANC was in a position to influence lucrative contracts that should go to the deserving people in the country.
But this was not the case, because some leaders managed to arrange that these contracts were being given to people with proxies from them as leaders in government, said Motlanthe.
“Once you do that, even if you get away with it, the reality is that this country will stagnate. And whatever we inherited, whether it’s infrastructure or whatever, will diminish,” he said.
His advice to the Nelson Mandela Bay region was for them to focus on rebuilding their branches and to ensure that they were properly constituted before they went to a regional elective conference.
In a what could be viewed a veiled attack at President Jacob Zuma, who enjoys singing during party gatherings, Motlanthe said it was only when the organisation was united, healthy and allowed thorough debates on what the challenges were – instead of singing – that it would find solutions.
“If we come together like this and we spend 80% of our time singing and glorifying the past, we will emerge with nothing.
“We will emerge from here not with any clarity, but with more confusion. There is no substitute to identifying the real problems,” Motlanthe said to loud laughter.
Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas, who shared the stage with Motlanthe, had earlier weighed in on the singing issue.
“Politics are being suffocated by song. For the few years, we have been singing, but we have not addressed some of the core challenges we are facing,” Jonas said.
He said the recent election results confirmed what everybody already knew – that the movement was in trouble.
Former president Kgalema Motlanthe has warned the ANC that if it did not get its house in order, it faced being irrelevant and would eventually die.
Motlanthe was speaking during a two-day regional consultative conference of the ANC at the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium in Port Elizabeth yesterday, where he addressed about 300 delegates on factionalism and renewal.
“Renewal cannot be just tampering with the structures. It means we must think very deeply about what the challenges are that our people face today. The ANC exists for one purpose only, and that is to address the problems of our people.
"If it [the ANC] is no longer addressing the problems of our people, we might as well begin writing the obituary of the ANC,” Motlanthe said.
He said it would not be the first time a glorious liberation movement lost its hegemony with the people, as this was what happened to other African countries’ liberation parties after they had been in power for 20 years.
Motlanthe said like empires and all living organisms, organisations also “rise and fall” because the rule of nature was that everything was in motion.
“Nothing is static. Nothing is permanent. That is why, when you are elected, you must understand that the platform of leadership that you have is not permanent.
"You serve in that capacity because members say so. Renewal must therefore be a function of understanding where we are, where we are heading to and what the challenges are,” he said.
For the 104-year-old ANC to continue to survive, it needed to adapt and have a long-term view to the future, as reliance on its struggle credentials was not enough for it to renew itself, said the former president.
“The minute we fail to adapt to the concrete conditions and the challenges of today, the organisation becomes irrelevant. And people realise they can continue with their lives and have progress without the ANC.
“That would be the end of [the ANC].”
As a governing party, the ANC was in a position to influence lucrative contracts that should go to the deserving people in the country.
But this was not the case, because some leaders managed to arrange that these contracts were being given to people with proxies from them as leaders in government, said Motlanthe.
“Once you do that, even if you get away with it, the reality is that this country will stagnate. And whatever we inherited, whether it’s infrastructure or whatever, will diminish,” he said.
His advice to the Nelson Mandela Bay region was for them to focus on rebuilding their branches and to ensure that they were properly constituted before they went to a regional elective conference.
In a what could be viewed a veiled attack at President Jacob Zuma, who enjoys singing during party gatherings, Motlanthe said it was only when the organisation was united, healthy and allowed thorough debates on what the challenges were – instead of singing – that it would find solutions.
“If we come together like this and we spend 80% of our time singing and glorifying the past, we will emerge with nothing.
“We will emerge from here not with any clarity, but with more confusion. There is no substitute to identifying the real problems,” Motlanthe said to loud laughter.
Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas, who shared the stage with Motlanthe, had earlier weighed in on the singing issue.
“Politics are being suffocated by song. For the few years, we have been singing, but we have not addressed some of the core challenges we are facing,” Jonas said.
He said the recent election results confirmed what everybody already knew – that the movement was in trouble.
Former president Kgalema Motlanthe has warned the ANC that if it did not get its house in order, it faced being irrelevant and would eventually die.
Motlanthe was speaking during a two-day regional consultative conference of the ANC at the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium in Port Elizabeth yesterday, where he addressed about 300 delegates on factionalism and renewal.
“Renewal cannot be just tampering with the structures. It means we must think very deeply about what the challenges are that our people face today. The ANC exists for one purpose only, and that is to address the problems of our people.
"If it [the ANC] is no longer addressing the problems of our people, we might as well begin writing the obituary of the ANC,” Motlanthe said.
He said it would not be the first time a glorious liberation movement lost its hegemony with the people, as this was what happened to other African countries’ liberation parties after they had been in power for 20 years.
Motlanthe said like empires and all living organisms, organisations also “rise and fall” because the rule of nature was that everything was in motion.
“Nothing is static. Nothing is permanent. That is why, when you are elected, you must understand that the platform of leadership that you have is not permanent.
"You serve in that capacity because members say so. Renewal must therefore be a function of understanding where we are, where we are heading to and what the challenges are,” he said.
For the 104-year-old ANC to continue to survive, it needed to adapt and have a long-term view to the future, as reliance on its struggle credentials was not enough for it to renew itself, said the former president.
“The minute we fail to adapt to the concrete conditions and the challenges of today, the organisation becomes irrelevant. And people realise they can continue with their lives and have progress without the ANC.
“That would be the end of [the ANC].”
As a governing party, the ANC was in a position to influence lucrative contracts that should go to the deserving people in the country.
But this was not the case, because some leaders managed to arrange that these contracts were being given to people with proxies from them as leaders in government, said Motlanthe.
“Once you do that, even if you get away with it, the reality is that this country will stagnate. And whatever we inherited, whether it’s infrastructure or whatever, will diminish,” he said.
His advice to the Nelson Mandela Bay region was for them to focus on rebuilding their branches and to ensure that they were properly constituted before they went to a regional elective conference.
In a what could be viewed a veiled attack at President Jacob Zuma, who enjoys singing during party gatherings, Motlanthe said it was only when the organisation was united, healthy and allowed thorough debates on what the challenges were – instead of singing – that it would find solutions.
“If we come together like this and we spend 80% of our time singing and glorifying the past, we will emerge with nothing.
“We will emerge from here not with any clarity, but with more confusion. There is no substitute to identifying the real problems,” Motlanthe said to loud laughter.
Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas, who shared the stage with Motlanthe, had earlier weighed in on the singing issue.
“Politics are being suffocated by song. For the few years, we have been singing, but we have not addressed some of the core challenges we are facing,” Jonas said.
He said the recent election results confirmed what everybody already knew – that the movement was in trouble.
