Nkosana Sibuyi

Posted by Nkosana Sibuyi: 19 November 2011

There are certain biblical verses that have remained relevant, appropriate and concrete to the material conditions under which humankind live. For instance, Luke 18:25, Mark 10:25 and Matthew 19:24 communicate about the limitations of the rich in terms of entrance into the kingdom of God. In addition, the verses postulate that everyone who jettisoned terrestrial demeanour “will receive hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.” Furthermore, the aforementioned verses intimate that Jesus said, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”

The disciples or followers of Jesus Christ were at pains to comprehend the message and they posed the fundamental question: “Who then can be saved?” as expressed in Luke 18:26. Married to this in Luke 18:27, Jesus replied, “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.” In essence, what these messages communicate is that God has the power, will, capacity, Spirit and capability to save humankind from evil and that the rich must be willing to put God before their immediate and individual possessions or interests.

It could be argued and contested that the African National Congress (ANC) document, Through the eye of a needle? Choosing the best cadres to lead transformation, was inspired by the verses are in Mark 10:25, Matthew 19:24 and Luke 18:25. This extraordinary document outlines the challenges faced at this stage, the kind of ANC required to meet defining challenges, principles of organisational democracy, constitutional guidelines for elections, broad requirements of leadership, the selection process, the base of leadership, why the issues should be interrogated and examined, contradictions that have played themselves out in the new terrain, how members must take charge and provide strategic leadership.

The eye of a needle, or a needle's eye, as captured in the biblical verses Luke 18:25, Mark 10:25 and Matthew 19:24 and thus finding expression in the above ANC document makes it patently clear that “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Furthermore, the ANC document stipulates that the “guidelines indicate the broad parameters within which every member of the ANC should exercise his/her right to shape the leadership collectives of the movement and ensure that it meets its historical mandate. In one sense they make it difficult for individuals to ascend to positions of leadership in the organisation.”

Owing to the complex challenges facing the ANC in the current conjuncture, in what way can the organisation reclaim its glorious past as the national liberation movement (NLM)? To what degree can the principles and values of the NLM and that of the ruling party be harmonised in a rapidly changing unpredictable political landscape? How resilient is the ANC in the current conjuncture a year before the celebration of the centenary? Will be the ANC still be there in the next 100 years? How will the current contradictions be managed in a manner that will affirm the gargantuan and colossal stature in the public mind and consciousness in South Africa, Africa, Diaspora and the world? Why does victimhood continue to win public sympathy?

A few cases of Mr Milton Morema, Mr John Block, Mr Tony Yengeni, President Jacob Zuma and recently Mr Julius Malema concretely confirm that victimhood spawned and won public sympathy in the public imagination. Out of such victimhood, emerged leaders whose unique selling point was premised on the belief that state apparatus are or were used to block them from ascending onto higher positions of leadership. In the process, it has become fashionable for people to project themselves as victims, with the hope that public sympathy will deliver them from evil. This is a strategic matter that requires continuing interrogation, examination and reflection. There are immense lessons that could be drawn from this experience.

Victimhood, based on a changing paradigm, the balance of evidence and power has created a possibility for people impelled onto higher positions of power. It could be argued that their (re)election onto positions of power was not, at all times, guided by the basic principles, values and norms inherent in the Through the eye of a needle document, which contends that: “To become an ANC leader is not an entitlement. It should not be an easy process attached merely to status. It should be informed first and foremost by the desire and commitment to serve the people, and a track record appreciated by ANC members and communities alike. Those in leadership positions should unite and guide the movement to be at the head of the process of change. They should lead the movement in its mission to organise and inspire the masses to be their own liberators. They should lead the task of governance with diligence. And, together, they should reflect continuity of a revolutionary tradition and renewal which sustains the movement in the long-term.”

Taken further, out of victimhood and public sympathy, President Jacob Zuma was elected to lead the ANC and by extension the country. When Mr Zuma was relieved of his duties as the Deputy President of the country on 14 June 2005, it gave him the oxygen to reinvent himself in the political landscape. The National General Council in 2005, National Policy Conference in 2007 and his court appearances were effectively used as the rostrum from which to project Mr Zuma as a victim of circumstances. The victimhood strategy succeeded. Consequently, the credible and prestige of the ANC was compromised contrary to the values and principles inherent in Through the eye of a needle document.

The bane of that strategy is that the immediate and loathsome interests trumped up logic, discipline, rationality and reason thus giving birth to the ANC. To recapitulate, his ascension to power was hailed as a concrete expression of a democratic process. In the same vein, it would be recalled that Mr Zuma, upon his election as the President of the country, intimated that he will follow former President Zuma’s footsteps of serving only one term as the President of the country. However, recent political developments, analysis of the balance of forces and power suggest that he is preparing himself for re-election at Mangaung on the occasion of the national conference of the ANC in December 2012.

The fluidity of change is patently clear that Mangaung will be, in and of itself, fundamentally different from Polokwane. The art and science of political strategy and management for Mangaung will afford the ANC a unique opportunity to regain any perceived or real lost ground in her centenary. What Mr Zuma should acknowledge, recognise and appreciate is that there are possibilities for him to affirm the permanence and the wisdom of practice through integrity, credibility, legitimacy, decorum and respect. Should he decide not to contest for the second term as the President of the ANC, he will emerge as one of the leaders who is not captured by the immediate and individual interests. History will absolve him. Mr Zuma has an obligation to preside over or hand over a united ANC at its anniversary. Consciously, that political act will gainsay the perceptions that he is driven by and grasped the essence of power. He will be regarded as a stalwart and disciplined cadre who has passed through the eye of a needle!

Professor Wole Soyinka, in his address, “A changing mask of fear” delivered as part of the Reith Lectures in March 2004 warned on the Concept of the Chosen because “choice remains the bedrock of the democratic process, and if people have made a choice that eliminates all further necessity for the ritual rounds of choosing, well… that argument appears to have reached its terminal point. History has been fulfilled. The perennial problem with that proposition of course is that it denies the dynamic nature of human society, and preaches that the purely fortuitous can substitute, at any time, for the eternal and immutable. Such a position opens the way for the triumph of a social order that is based on the concept of the Chosen-a mockery of the principle of choice”

As an aside, the African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL) and the country at large must have learnt from the Zuma victimhood experience, its success, prospects, limitations and implications on the national polity and discourse. It is appropriate, relevant and understandable to focus on the centrality of exorcising the virus of victimhood in South Africa’s body politic. At a tactical level, the ANCYL will be mobilised to rebel against Mr Zuma and the senior leadership of the ANC. The ANCYL in KZN may not necessarily support the rebellion given the recent political treatment (disbandment) meted out to then by the ANCYL national leadership. Mr Zuma may be accused of using state resources to malign, trivialise, sideline and marginalise his political nemesis. The context and content of what happened on 14 June 2005 and 10 November 2011 are fundamentally different. What is desirable, practical and possible in addressing these contradictions is for Mr Zuma to desist from putting his ring in the hat for Mangaung.

The ANCYL has indicated that it will appeal against the conviction or sentence and said that “There can be no shortcuts, such as high-handed disciplinary banishments, to resolve the real political problems. 2012 should mark an unprecedented overview and rebirth of our ANC to race the challenges of this and future generations of South Africa and the African continent as a whole”.

In essence, the appeal may drag on until the Policy Conference and National Conference at Mangaung. In this context, perhaps time has ripened to deconstruct the notion of the Policy Conference of the ANC. There are always surprises at the policy conference and in the current context this may include but not limited to the nationalisation debate and expropriation of land. Since the ANC is a ruling party at this stage, what possibilities are there to transform the Policy Conference into an Implementation Conference?

Professor Njabulo Smakahle Ndebele recounts in Redefining Relevance thus: “There must be an accompanying change of discourse from the rhetoric of oppression to that of process and exploration. This would imply open-endedness in the use of language, a search for originality of expression and a sensitivity to dialogue”

Of course, the ANC must recognise the manipulative intent of the virus of victimhood or “victims of false hopes” leading into a failure to understand the phenomena of form and content, form and formlessness, knowledge and ignorance, wealth and poverty, knowledge and ignorance that do not match public and popular expectations. For the ANC’s own unique needs, it is imperative to draw on the insights from the holy biblical verses alluded to in the prelude and the Through the Eye of a needle document. The document unapologetically concludes: “So, it may not exactly be through the eye of a needle. But we should strive all the time to ensure that our leaders are indeed made of sterner revolutionary stuff.”

REFERENCES

1. The Holy Bible
2. Prof Njabulo Ndebele. 1991. Redefining Relevance. Rediscovery of the Ordinary. Essays on South African Literature and Culture.
3. Prof Wole Soyinka. 2004. Climate of Fear. Royal Institute of Science. March 2004
4. Umrabulo Number 11, June-July 2001. Through the eye of a needle? Choosing the best cadres to lead transformation. An ANC National Working Committee discussion document
5. ANC Youth League Special National Executive Committee statement on the outcomes of the ANC National Disciplinary Committee. 16 November 2011