NOW that Numsa is resolute to form a new political party, what will become of Cosatu? Can the 29-year old federation be saved from a possible break-up? A similar question applies to the SACP.
The SACP has never been so challenged in its claim as vanguard of the working class as it is today.
Does the formation of a rival worker’s party suggest the party has become irrelevant?
Talk of saving Cosatu suggests doing so would be a seamless exercise. That’s far from reality. What has become of the federation is a result of factors beyond the control of well-wishers. Cosatu suffers from deep-seated problems. Many unionists are indifferent to workers’ interests, but are pre-occupied with personal benefits. They make money, some in unscrupulous ways, through the investment arms that many of the unions have created.
Attendance to day-to-day union activities has consequently suffered.
The net outcome has been relative silence on workers’ issues.
This is part of the discord within Cosatu. And they’ve turned on each other to silence criticism against the pursuit of personal comfort.
The save-Cosatu campaign will obviously have to remake the federation in order to rescue it. And, given the entrenched financial interests, such attempts are likely to face vehement resistance. So, this has become a source of tension that had to come to some form resolution, in one way or another.
At some level though Cosatu’s present travails were always inevitable.
Their source lies not only in the present, but also stems from the past. And, this brings me directly to Numsa’s proposed new party.
Cosatu affiliates were never entirely unanimous on the workers’ alliance with the ANC.
In what became known as the “workerists vs populists debate” towards forming the federation in 1985, some unionists wanted trade unions to remain independent, while others agitated for collaboration with political formations.
Workerists argued that taking part in political campaigns posed the risk of neglecting to form strong shop-floor structures and not pursuing workers’ interests.
They were not entirely convinced that the United Democratic Front (UDF) and the exiled liberation movement had workers’ interests at heart, suspecting them of harbouring bourgeois inclinations.
Populists countered that political involvement was inescapable in light of the repressive nature of the South African state.
In addition to exploitation, blacks also encountered racism that could only be eliminated through national liberation.
Cosatu’s formation and the subsequent alliance with the UDF, coupled with its adoption of the ANC’s Freedom Charter, was an uneasy compromise. It was necessitated by the paramountcy of achieving unity amongst workers in order to attain a national democratic breakthrough. Eliminating racism, it was also argued, would create favourable conditions to address the plight of workers.
But, the sincerity of the ANC towards a working class agenda remained suspect, especially in Numsa’s eyes. And, Numsa considers what has been happening in the last 20 years a validation of that suspicion.
South Africa suffers a massive unemployment rate and wages are painfully low whilst and management earns massive salaries.
The black middle- and upper classes have consequently grown tremendously widening existing inequality not only across races, but within the black community.
To Numsa the current dispensation has entrenched capitalism, which they consider the source of their misery. They want to march on straight to socialism, to build socialism now!
Numsa’s clamour is not peculiar. That’s what the SACP promised workers. The party had also started off being suspicious of the ANC. In fact, it was the first to raise such suspicion back in the 1920s, but eventually settled on what it called a two-stage revolution theory.
National liberation first, then a forward march towards socialism.
Numsa bought the theory after some persuasion, following its formation in the 1980s.
They were also partly persuaded by the ANC’s flirtation with socialism. It had declared itself a “disciplined force of the left”, completely different from standard nationalist movements which are prone to a bourgeois orientation.
In other words, the proposed formation of the United Front is an indictment on the SACP. The ANC can be forgiven. They’re a multi-class coalition by nature, however much they may pretend to be something else. This showed even before the party came to power. It promised redress to the aspirant black business, just as it did to the exploited black workers.
But, the SACP kept the faith, persisting with the promise to march on towards socialism after the democratic breakthrough.
Their confrontation and subsequent fall-out with Thabo Mbeki’s administration was supposedly a result of that pursuit. Mbeki dismissed them as pseudo marxists.
But that never derailed the communists. They continued to assail Mbeki’s pro-market policies as a betrayal of the working people. Not only were they critics, but they also led the successful campaign to remove Mbeki from office.
Mbeki’s removal was supposedly a fatal blow against capital. He had been, at least according to the party, an instrument of capital. Now the path to socialism was supposedly a lot clearer. But, there hasn’t been much movement since then.
Instead of progress, the party has itself changed. Whereas in the past office-bearers of the party resisted joining government, choosing to build the working class instead, now they’re part of the state.
This is rife throughout all spheres of government.
The party’s constitution even had to be changed to facilitate this co-option into government.
Now that most party officials are ensconced within corridors of power, they are no longer vocal critics of government. Yet, this administration is not discernibly different to that of its predecessor, which they lambasted ferociously. In fact, Zwelinzima Vavi has likened this administration to a pack of hyenas, calling it a predatory elite.
Rather than criticise, the party has been promoting use of neo-traditional language in public discourse.
Citizens are told to refer to the president of the republic as “baba” – father.
This term is quite suitable for a private space, but wholly inappropriate in the public domain. It invokes a hierarchical relationship – between a senior and a subordinate, or father and child – something that is inconsistent with the democratic principle of a sovereign electorate, to which the executive accounts.
The SACP has reduced itself to a lobby group that secures patronage for its officials. Principles have consequently been forfeited.
Consider its contradictory posture towards the findings of the Office of the Public Protector. It rejects those findings on Nkandla, but insists that the SABC implements Thuli Madonsela’s recommendations in relation to Hlaudi Motsoeneng.
In their violent denunciation of the Nkandla report, they’ve challenged the very legitimacy of the institution, labelling Madonsela part of the “anti-majoritarian force”.
But all this vitriol is forgotten in relation to findings on the SABC where they’re unrelenting that the broadcaster must respect Madonsela.
Personal pursuits have come to masquerade as revolutionary interests. Umqol’ uphandle! (the mask has fallen off). The proposed workers’ party is a logical consequence of the moment, spurred both by self-interest and history.
Mcebisi Ndletyana is the head of Mistra’s faculty of political economy
SACP mask now off
The SACP has never been so challenged in its claim as vanguard of the working class as it is today.
Does the formation of a rival worker’s party suggest the party has become irrelevant?
Talk of saving Cosatu suggests doing so would be a seamless exercise. That’s far from reality. What has become of the federation is a result of factors beyond the control of well-wishers. Cosatu suffers from deep-seated problems. Many unionists are indifferent to workers’ interests, but are pre-occupied with personal benefits. They make money, some in unscrupulous ways, through the investment arms that many of the unions have created.
Attendance to day-to-day union activities has consequently suffered.
The net outcome has been relative silence on workers’ issues.
This is part of the discord within Cosatu. And they’ve turned on each other to silence criticism against the pursuit of personal comfort.
The save-Cosatu campaign will obviously have to remake the federation in order to rescue it. And, given the entrenched financial interests, such attempts are likely to face vehement resistance. So, this has become a source of tension that had to come to some form resolution, in one way or another.
At some level though Cosatu’s present travails were always inevitable.
Their source lies not only in the present, but also stems from the past. And, this brings me directly to Numsa’s proposed new party.
Cosatu affiliates were never entirely unanimous on the workers’ alliance with the ANC.
In what became known as the “workerists vs populists debate” towards forming the federation in 1985, some unionists wanted trade unions to remain independent, while others agitated for collaboration with political formations.
Workerists argued that taking part in political campaigns posed the risk of neglecting to form strong shop-floor structures and not pursuing workers’ interests.
They were not entirely convinced that the United Democratic Front (UDF) and the exiled liberation movement had workers’ interests at heart, suspecting them of harbouring bourgeois inclinations.
Populists countered that political involvement was inescapable in light of the repressive nature of the South African state.
In addition to exploitation, blacks also encountered racism that could only be eliminated through national liberation.
Cosatu’s formation and the subsequent alliance with the UDF, coupled with its adoption of the ANC’s Freedom Charter, was an uneasy compromise. It was necessitated by the paramountcy of achieving unity amongst workers in order to attain a national democratic breakthrough. Eliminating racism, it was also argued, would create favourable conditions to address the plight of workers.
But, the sincerity of the ANC towards a working class agenda remained suspect, especially in Numsa’s eyes. And, Numsa considers what has been happening in the last 20 years a validation of that suspicion.
South Africa suffers a massive unemployment rate and wages are painfully low whilst and management earns massive salaries.
The black middle- and upper classes have consequently grown tremendously widening existing inequality not only across races, but within the black community.
To Numsa the current dispensation has entrenched capitalism, which they consider the source of their misery. They want to march on straight to socialism, to build socialism now!
Numsa’s clamour is not peculiar. That’s what the SACP promised workers. The party had also started off being suspicious of the ANC. In fact, it was the first to raise such suspicion back in the 1920s, but eventually settled on what it called a two-stage revolution theory.
National liberation first, then a forward march towards socialism.
Numsa bought the theory after some persuasion, following its formation in the 1980s.
They were also partly persuaded by the ANC’s flirtation with socialism. It had declared itself a “disciplined force of the left”, completely different from standard nationalist movements which are prone to a bourgeois orientation.
In other words, the proposed formation of the United Front is an indictment on the SACP. The ANC can be forgiven. They’re a multi-class coalition by nature, however much they may pretend to be something else. This showed even before the party came to power. It promised redress to the aspirant black business, just as it did to the exploited black workers.
But, the SACP kept the faith, persisting with the promise to march on towards socialism after the democratic breakthrough.
Their confrontation and subsequent fall-out with Thabo Mbeki’s administration was supposedly a result of that pursuit. Mbeki dismissed them as pseudo marxists.
But that never derailed the communists. They continued to assail Mbeki’s pro-market policies as a betrayal of the working people. Not only were they critics, but they also led the successful campaign to remove Mbeki from office.
Mbeki’s removal was supposedly a fatal blow against capital. He had been, at least according to the party, an instrument of capital. Now the path to socialism was supposedly a lot clearer. But, there hasn’t been much movement since then.
Instead of progress, the party has itself changed. Whereas in the past office-bearers of the party resisted joining government, choosing to build the working class instead, now they’re part of the state.
This is rife throughout all spheres of government.
The party’s constitution even had to be changed to facilitate this co-option into government.
Now that most party officials are ensconced within corridors of power, they are no longer vocal critics of government. Yet, this administration is not discernibly different to that of its predecessor, which they lambasted ferociously. In fact, Zwelinzima Vavi has likened this administration to a pack of hyenas, calling it a predatory elite.
Rather than criticise, the party has been promoting use of neo-traditional language in public discourse.
Citizens are told to refer to the president of the republic as “baba” – father.
This term is quite suitable for a private space, but wholly inappropriate in the public domain. It invokes a hierarchical relationship – between a senior and a subordinate, or father and child – something that is inconsistent with the democratic principle of a sovereign electorate, to which the executive accounts.
The SACP has reduced itself to a lobby group that secures patronage for its officials. Principles have consequently been forfeited.
Consider its contradictory posture towards the findings of the Office of the Public Protector. It rejects those findings on Nkandla, but insists that the SABC implements Thuli Madonsela’s recommendations in relation to Hlaudi Motsoeneng.
In their violent denunciation of the Nkandla report, they’ve challenged the very legitimacy of the institution, labelling Madonsela part of the “anti-majoritarian force”.
But all this vitriol is forgotten in relation to findings on the SABC where they’re unrelenting that the broadcaster must respect Madonsela.
Personal pursuits have come to masquerade as revolutionary interests. Umqol’ uphandle! (the mask has fallen off). The proposed workers’ party is a logical consequence of the moment, spurred both by self-interest and history.
Mcebisi Ndletyana is the head of Mistra’s faculty of political economy
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos