The Zuma project is incrisis, marked by the assertion of patriarchal values, rampant homophobia,and a shift towards militarism.
The Zuma project is incrisis, marked by the assertion of patriarchal values, rampant homophobia,and a shift towards militarism.
This is according to Prof Raymond Suttner, who delivered a lecture at the Humanities Department at Rhodes University on Monday.
Suttner, who has been an underground operative, political prisoner and a key figure in the African National Congress (ANC), argues that the ANC has failed to recognise identities that fall outside the national project, and that its motto, “we are one”, refers only to a “one” that is male and African.
Indeed, Suttner believes, “gender equality is not happening”. Though women hold positions in Parliament, sexism is rampant, and patriarchy is triumphant in a way that it has not been for some time.
Suttner also says that there has been an increase in attacks of homosexuals, particularly the raping of lesbians. There are distinct identities in the ANC, and homosexuality is regarded as “unAfrican”. Suttner says the Zuma project is marked by displays of militarism.
One example is the support and establishment of the UmKhonto we Sizwe (MK) veterans, a group that sought to make the Western Cape ungovernable after Democratic Alliance leader Helen Zille won the provincial election.
There are unprecedented threats, like ‘Kill for Zuma’, to which the president has responded with a “beaming expression”. His trademark song, Umshini Wam’ (Bring me my machine gun) was sung outside the courtroom during his 2006 rape trial.
Suttner notes that Zuma displayed no signs of humility during his trial, and that the song is not only evocative in a militaristic sense, but is also a phallic symbol.
This leads to consideration of Zuma’s sexual escapades. His polygamy is not, says Suttner,owing to his “irresistible sexual attraction”, but has emerged from a combination of wealth and power.
However, Suttner says this crisis does not stem from Jacob Zuma himself, it is a systemic one of the ANC. He regards ANC history as one of “rupture and continuity’, and believes that this history must be consulted to understand Zuma’s ise to power. Since its formation, the ANC has stressed unity.
Yet when Nelson Mandela entered into negotiations prior to the 1994 elections, he acted without collective sanction. Suttner believes it is likely that other members of the party would have prevented him from doing this, had he consulted them.
The Mandela presidency, then, was a “manifestation of his right to override the organisation”. By
the time Thabo Mbeki took over the leadership, the party’s constitutional structures already had been sidelined.
Zuma has continued to follow Mbeki’s policies, but, according to Suttner, he is regarded by many people as different to his predecessor. This is mainly because of his perceived popular touch.
“It could have been someone else besides Zuma – but somehow he fitted the part,” says Suttner. In fact, Mandela, Mbeki and Zuma were “inseparable” until 2005.
When Mbeki dismissed Zuma after the Schabir Shaik trial, Zuma was taken out of the darkness and made out to be a socialist hero, though he had left the South African Communist Party (SACP) some time ago.
The ANC today is, according to Suttner, held up by a base of “thieves, the power-hungry, ‘fairly honest’ capitalists, and looters”.
Further, Zuma is regarded as the glue holding together the interests of communism and, on the other hand, capitalism.
This contradiction reveals an “unstable coalition”, and indicates that the Zuma project is a indeed a crisis of the ANC.
He proposes that the solution to this “corroded ANC”, is organisation, as this is what held the party together during its birth and the years spent fighting against apertheid.
After the unity of the party was disrupted, multiple centres of power emerged, which could favour violence and corruption even at the level of the state.
Suttner calls for the establishment of a non-sectarian platform that opens its doors to both ANC and non-ANC members.
This platform should not be allied to groups that are sexist and homophobic. For Suttner, questions of individual identity have the right to exist independently of any national identity.
This vision should not have a leftist approach, but be part of a broader and emancipatory tradition. He says people should come to this platform with visions of democracy and peace.
