Government by or over the People? The African National Congress's Conception of Democracy

Abstract

The paper offers an interpretation of the African National Congress's conception of democracy. The interpretation is framed by three questions. Who are the people? How should the people govern? How should capital, capitalists and civil society be governed? Attention is given to the party's views on participatory democracy, its vanguardist claims and its views on aspects of state-capital and state-civil society relations. It is proposed that the party's tendency to discount diversity of interests, to persist with claims to superior understanding of complex issues and to preach hegemony as a virtue might signify government over the people rather than government by the people.

Notes

1. Hereafter all terms that are placed in italics should be read as belonging specifically to ANC discourses as these are reflected in the cited sources.

2. All but one of the ANC documents were sourced from the ANC web site (www.anc.org.za) and were subjected to computer-assisted content searching and analysis. One consequence of the procedures is that page numbers are not available for most of the documents. Paragraph numbers are cited where possible.

3. See also Prior's (2003, pp. 16–20) comments about electronic and other forms of cutting, pasting, editing etc. in the production and consumption of documents. Quotations and paraphrases comprise around 30% of my exposition (not counting the references).

4. The discussion of participatory democracy is a partial exception. Giliomee, Myburgh & Schlemmer (2001), McKinley (2001), Ryklief (2002) and Johnson (2002)—amongst others–have contributed analyses which reflect on both ideas and practices. Closer to the agenda of ideology critique are articles by Chipkin (2003), Hudson (2000), Stacey (2003) and Van Vuuren (2005). See also note 21.

5. In this sense, it seems to be an approximate synonym of the people. A somewhat different meaning is conveyed by the idea that the motive forces refer to relatively organised and active forces, for example as in the sense of a mobilised working class (response by Raymond Suttner to my question during a Unisa College of Law Seminar on The Freedom Charter, 23 June 2005). This is similar to the sense conveyed by Netshitenzhe's (1996) references to ‘the forces that drive the NDR and take it forward’.

6. Movement is itself a polysemous ANC concept whose references and ideological functions deserve scrutiny. The ‘official’ meaning is stated in ANC (1997c). As I read the documents, the term could—depending on the immediate textual context—refer to one or all of the party, the Tripartite Alliance (consisting of the ANC, the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions) and an entity that is roughly congruent with the motive forces.

7. As quoted previously: ‘All citizens should be guaranteed the right to elect a government of their choice, freedom of expression, freedom from discrimination, and other rights entrenched in the constitution … on the basis of equality.’

8. A number of authors have claimed that the ANC leadership and/or the Government have either actively or passively limited opportunities for popular participation in governmental processes (see e.g. Johnson, 2000, pp. 19, 21; Saul, 2002, pp. 31–32; Gelb, 2003, p. 64).

9. On corporatism in South Africa see Pretorius (1996, 2000).

10. Imbizo (Xhosa), or Izimbizo (Zulu), means ‘a calling together’.

11. The growing emphasis on imbizo recommends fruitful lines for ideology analysis. Nash (1999), termed the practices as recalled by Mandela in his court statement ‘the tribal model of democracy’.

12. See information at http://www.info.gov.za/issues/imbizo/index.html.

13. The distinction is inspired by Sartori (1987), pp. 34–35)

14. From ‘partocracy’: rule by the party (perhaps a leadership cadre). The adjective ‘authoritarian’ comes to mind, but I am inclined towards Sartori's (1962), pp. 137–57) views in this regard. The intent is to describe a regime (i.e. a normative structure of rule or domination; not ‘a government’) that leans (whether in talking or doing) towards domination by a party, or some other organised group (of whatever description) and away from democracy. However, given the electoral underpinnings of ANC power, ‘authoritarian’ would, at least, recognise the authoritative element of its claims; that is, the claims that have been authorised through the electoral process.

15. For example Macpherson (1977); Pateman (1970); and, in South Africa, Turner, (1972). My use of ‘experimentation’ comes from Held (1996), p. 270): ‘the participatory society must be an experimental society. …’

16. For an ANC view on the ‘political and ideological struggle to set the national agenda’, see the eleven-part series titled ‘The Sociology of Public Discourse in Democratic South Africa’ in ANC Today 5(2)–5(11); available at www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/2004

17. The term ‘mobilist [party]’ is taken from Weiner and LaPalombara (1966), p. 425). It refers to ‘the use of the party as an instrument for effecting attitudinal and behavioral changes within a society’—in contrast to ‘the adaptive party whose primary concern is its adaptation to the attitudes of the public in its quest for electoral support’.

18. It is not as if the ANC is unaware of the strain between democracy and its possible antitheses:

[T]he notion that economic progress can be attained through some kind of benevolent dictatorship does not hold any water. It is in fact dangerous for it assumes that some self-declared elite can deliver social liberation from on high to a meek and grateful mass that does not participate in its own advancement … On the other hand, mass participation does not imply paralysis or wilful inaction in the name of endless consultation. Decisive, bold and speedy action should always be pursued, without derogating from the need for the people themselves to facilitate such promptness in meeting their needs. (ANC, 1997a)

19. These include, amongst others, the principles that the ‘decision of the majority prevails’ and that ‘higher structures bind lower structures’ (ANC, 1997d).

20. ‘The democratic external form which characterizes the life of political parties may readily veil from superficial observers the tendency towards aristocracy, or rather towards oligarchy, which is inherent in all party organization.’ (Michels, 1959[1915], p. 11)

21. This question reminds of difficulties around analytical distinctions between ‘ideas’ and ‘actions’. On ANC actions in relation to opposition see Giliomee, Myburgh & Schlemmer (2001); McKinley (2001); and Southall (2003).

22. This apparently refers to the left-wing of the union movement and to leftist social movements.

23. This was probably part of its defence of the adoption by the Government of the Growth, Employment and Redistribution Strategy (GEAR) with its ‘market friendly’ stance.

24. In ANC documents the concept capital seems to be used to designate the resource as well as the class.

25. The ANC's view on property relations is, nevertheless, decidedly capitalist:

The NDR does not aim to reshape property relations in the most fundamental way of creating a classless society where there are no exploiters and exploited. It does not seek to eliminate capital and capitalism. However, by definition, the NDR must see to the de-racialisation of ownership, accumulation and allocation of capital; and it should do this in a manner that benefits the poor. (ANC, 1998)