David Beresford
another country
Reputation is notoriously fickle and, however high one’s standing in public esteem, one can be sure that time will come to challenge it.
Winston Churchill’s is an outstanding example. Widely considered to have beeen one of the greatest men of the 20th century for the lead he gave against totalitarianism, some reputable historians have recently put a question mark against the uncompromising nature of his stand against the fascist threat, producing evidence to suggest that he was looking to negotiate with Adolf Hitler in 1940. History is, of course, written by victors and it therefore should come as no surprise, in the local jurisdiction, to see that a victorious President Thabo Mbeki is anxious to acquire those particular spoils of battle.
The president first showed that inclination when the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) produced its final report, which he indignantly denounced and the publication of which he attempted to block.
His reaction, in retrospect, was predictable considering the TRC’s decision to accept that truth takes many forms. If there is one thing a victor is likely to insist upon it is the singularity of truth, particularly where his particular battlefield is concerned. All of which helps us to come to an understanding of what might otherwise be a confusing development: the launch by the South African Democratic Education Trust last week of the “Road to Democracy Project”.
The project is tasked to give a … a … well, let’s play safe and call it a more “democratic” version of the truth than the TRC managed to produce.
The trust that oversees the project is headed by what some might think a curious mix of characters to engage in such an academic exercise. They include Minister in the Office of the President Essop Pahad as chair; Minister of Intelligence Lindiwe Sisulu; the chief of the army service corps, General A Masondo; and a representative of the Umkhonto weSizweVeterans’ Association, Isaac Makopo. From the private sector there are representatives of South African Breweries, MTN, Nedcor and BMW.
Curious indeed. But, when one thinks about it, there is a certain logic there. After all, who better to know a victor’s mind where the truth of war is concerned than his chief lieutenant, the head of the secret services, one of his generals and the leader of the relevant veteran’s association.
And the representatives of big business? Well, perhaps it needs be appreciated that the country has recently emerged from not one, but two wars and, as a consequence, two victors need be recognised.
One was the liberation war led by “the Movement” (to use the semi-mystical term Mbeki chooses to characterise the disparate strands of the anti-apartheid struggle). The other was the worldwide ideological struggle in which the capitalist ethic triumphed over the socialist. So we have today a second victor whose right to write history is implicitly acknowledged by the other victor, Mbeki. The trend to recognise free market rule and pay tribute to big business is evident in the ascendancy they are being allowed in other areas of society and fields of human endeavour. The commercialisation of health, for example, with the patenting of medical advances. Or, more locally, the triumph of commercial branding in sport that reached something of an apogee last year when the Springboks ran on to the field in the Tri-Nations disguised as beer bottles.
It is all justified, of course, in the name of “research”, or “development”, or other financial exigencies. Further advances (or retreats) along these lines can be anticipated; Johannesburg will no doubt shortly be renamed Coco-Cola City, justifying it by the subsidisation of the rates, and the parish priest will be making pious references from the pulpit to Jesus “Bankfin” Christ with an eye to the steeple fund.
A “strategic alliance” is the way future historians are likely to characterise the relationship between our two victors, in recognition that rarely are winners equal, that they must inevitably slip into a hierarchy of vassalage. And, although the president (through Pahad) has been swift to grab the chair of South African history, one cannot help but detect a certain illogic, a lack of balance in the composition of Mbeki’s history “trust”.
What justifies BMW’s interest in South African history, unless it is slight partnership of guilt where concentration camps are concerned?
Where are the giants of South African commerce and industry, the mining houses, the insurance giants, the likes of Old Mutual, Anglo and De Beers?
Maybe they are not that keen on a political prince who betrays an instinctive passion for the centralisation of power in his own hands. Perhaps they are not comfortable with his occasional lapses into Stalin-speak and his self-evident identification with the butcher of Matabeleland?
Maybe they’ve lost interest in South African history?