New positions, old values? Ben Turok questions whether the new emerging black middle class will remain loyal to the liberation movement
As the colonial era ended in Africa, the imperialist powers set about deliberately creating a neo-colonial comprador class through partnerships in business, by the co-option of political party leaders, by training civil servants and army officers in the imperial country and so on.
This was to ensure both a smooth transition and that former colonies remained firmly within the orbit of the imperial power, their economies continuing to serve foreign rather than national interests.
However, in South Africa, attempts to create a domestic neo-colonial comprador class were pathetic. The wall surrounding white privilege was too pronounced to allow black co-option to take place. The tricameral system was a joke, and efforts to co-opt the coloured and Indian people made no dent on the African masses whose role in the transition was decisive.
And so white authority was swept away and African majority rule installed. Fortunately the African National Congress stood for unity of the black people and for non-racialism, and so the basis was laid for a non-sectarian future.
But since April 1994, and at amazing speed, African mobility has taken off. Black personnel have moved into the highest positions of the economy, including that of the government, monopoly capital, the public service, the security forces and the professions. Others have built medium-sized businesses on the basis of preferential state contracts.
The question now being debated with increasing intensity is whether or not these strata remain part of the motive forces of liberation, or whether they have been co-opted by the former ruling class and therefore become comprador.
It is a difficult question to answer owing to the speed of the process positions have not yet become crystallised and because so many of the new personnel in positions of power were prominent revolutionaries in the ANC.
No doubt their actions will, in due course, identify their social roles in the system, but we cannot depend on that alone. Some objective criteria are needed.
While we cannot doubt the political integrity of these people, the question is whether their positions within the system of economic and state power will allow them to do so.
Does this mean that the new incumbents should now be seen in the role of members of the bourgeoisie? They would surely reject such an identity on the grounds of their continuing commitment to the national democratic revolution.
A reasonable case exists for members who hold office in state positions, including parastatals, who will have little difficulty maintaining their earlier commitments. After all, their jobs require an adherence to the governments political positions. So, even if their posts provide them with a new lifestyle, they can be seen to be part of the motive forces of transformation.
Similarly, small and medium businesses which have emerged on the basis of preferential state contracts would also claim that their activities do not conflict with a loyalty to the revolution, and with some good reason.
But what of former comrades who have joined the ranks of monopoly capitalism, even if only as junior partners? Clearly, the previous monopolists of Anglo American and the rest have acted with alacrity to make space on the bench for former leaders of the struggle, in the same way that they created space for Afrikaner capital many decades ago.
Can these people maintain their adherence to the national democratic revolution? Does their colour and former role override the logic of their present positions?
There are many more obstacles to be overcome here. First, these people are major employers of low-paid workers, and it cannot be long before they have to take class positions in defence of their profits.
Second, many of them are putting out tentacles to foreign capital and establishing partnerships in competition with domestic capital. Does this represent a classical neo-colonial relationship?
It is vital that we begin to unpack the new emerging black middle and upper classes and analyse what political identity is given them by the logic of their socio-economic roles, in the same way that this was done in neo-colonial Africa. I would argue that these people have changed their class position.
In the case of the black bourgeoisie, the argument is sometimes advanced that economic empowerment of the black elite is historically justified and indeed necessary if the white outposts of internal colonialism are to be penetrated and undermined. This implies that such entryism is politically correct and to be welcomed.
However, we must ask whether these entrants ought to be allowed to enjoy the same fruits of office that were enjoyed by the white masters. Ought they not be required to sacrifice some of these rewards so that we do not entrench internal colonialism in a new form with a black privileged class? After all, we remain an under-developed country where the narrowing of social differences is a high priority.
Secondly, is there any prospect of the newly empowered acting in concert with the liberation movement to achieve the objectives of the national democratic revolution? Will their new values of luxury consumptionism and profit-making lead us to the national democratic revolution?
The indications are that the owners of monopoly capitalist corporations, no matter their colour, are more likely to defend their existing partnerships with white and/or foreign capital. There is nothing patriotic about that.
Perhaps it is too early to be too categorical on such matters. Perhaps South Africas newly rich may still surprise us and remain loyal to the values and liberation movement they upheld so recently.
It may indeed be the case that the ANCs broad church will embrace even monopoly capitalists in the struggle for a new South Africa where the poor will receive priority in the redistribution of resources.
But it seems wise to learn from other colonial experiences and be forewarned. Otherwise we may be led into unwarranted alliances and pay a heavy price.
Professor Ben Turok is an ANC MP and a member of the finance committee