(Graphic: John McCann/M&G)
There is far more meaning in the 2024 election results than we South Africans are willing to face. We will try to entertain ourselves with the political machinations and scenarios of various coalition possibilities without acknowledging that it is not only our democracy that is in rapid decline, but also our commitment to progressive values, principles and ideals.
Jacob Zuma defeated Thabo Mbeki 60-40 at the 2007 ANC national conference in Polokwane. There was a lot of oohing and aahing by Mbeki supporters on the floor of the conference when the results were read out because, in their view, a 20 percentage points loss by a sitting president is a hiding. A friend put this into perspective with this insightful question: “What is the difference between 40 and 60?” In an election, the difference is not 20, it’s 10, because if one gets 10, the other loses 10.
This outlook is important now that the 2024 national and provincial elections have concluded, with the ANC getting only 41% of the vote. It lost about 25% to ANC breakaway parties, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party. If the ANC focuses on trying to get 10% from these two parties in the next elections it will, in theory, be able to get back the political power it has lost.
Do we relegate the ANC falling under 50% and its dramatic fall to 41% to the rhetoric of the EFF’s Julius Malema and the ethno-chauvinism of the MK party’s Jacob Zuma? What if there was no EFF and MK party, and the ANC got 51%, would that be okay? Of course not, because it would mean the ANC would not have admitted just how much it has let the country down.
Once it became apparent that a hung parliament was the most likely outcome and some type of coalition arrangement was necessary, many lost interest in analysing the results, preferring to focus on what coalitions could arise. This was true for all South Africans, including leaders of political parties and commentators.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) was openly stating that a coalition between EFF, MK party and the ANC was a doomsday scenario (in fairness, this was also a part of their election campaign). In other words only the DA can “Rescue SA” and form a coalition government with the ANC. Yet the DA and the EFF have been cooperating with each other since 2016.
The EFF, which was eclipsed in this election by the MK party, were also quick off the mark indicating their willingness to work with the ANC and president Cyril Ramaphosa. The MK party was silent, ostensibly focusing on questioning the results, possibly because it wants an unfettered mandate in KwaZulu-Natal. It also had the most to celebrate — one could almost hear their spiritual leader Jacob Zuma’s chuckle. The ANC said it was open to discussion with all parties and was clear that it would not entertain any notion of dumping Ramaphosa.
The focus has also moved to the form of a coalition arrangement, of which there are a number of possibilities. One option is a government of national unity, similar to that formed in 1994, where the majority parties co-operated and ran the government. It could also be a grand coalition, where two or more parties partner up and run the government.
A coalition can be formalised through a “supply and confidence”’ agreement, where the coalition partners agree that they will not seek nor support a vote of no confidence in the government, will pass key legislation such as the budget, as well as share certain ministries and allow programmes that they may previously not have agreed to. Another option is a minority government, which may or may not get the support of the various parties in parliament and therefore is never assured that its proposals will be passed or that it cannot be removed from government. The final option is that all the parties do nothing for the next three months, a government is not formed and another election must be held.
As a society we need to recognise that if we focus on the names (political parties) and the coalition arrangements (the form), then we are not hearing ourselves and what we said in these elections. We are refusing to focus on the content. It is only the content of what society we claim we wish to build that will tell us who and what we must form.
Anyone who listened to Zuma addressing the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) Results Operations Centre on Saturday night must have had the chills. Those of us who lived through the early 1990s, before the 1994 democratic breakthrough, can tell you how scared we were that our country would become a killing field. On Saturday night, Zuma was saying that if the formal announcement of the election results was not postponed, there would be “problems”. He sounded just like the Inkatha Freedom Party’s Mangosuthu Buthelezi, who warned Nelson Mandela that if he came to Ulundi there would be problems. To some, Zuma reminded them of Unita leader Jonas Savimbi in Angola.
But it gets worse. All the votes the MK party has mustered are simply regarded as ethnic or tribal votes — Zulus voting for Zulus. In addition to being lazy analysis, this is insulting and wrong. Even if it was an ethnic vote, the question is: what have we been doing as a society or a government to uproot tribalism since 1994?
Haven’t we played to these low common denominators of white solidarity and fear, black consciousness and fear, or that one’s culture is under threat, be it Afrikaans, or so-called Coloured, Zulu, Xhosa, Sesotho, Tswana, Pedi and so forth? Since 1994 we have put aside building a united country, and instead retreated into various racial and cultural laagers so that as individuals we benefit. We are way more divided in a democratic South Africa than we were in apartheid South Africa — besides being a lot more selfish.
Tribalism and disunity could have died a natural death if we had been able to deal with the economic problems that our society, especially the poor, face on a daily basis. Overcoming apartheid, more than anything else, is the restoration of dignity. Secure employment is the best way to restore dignity.
As much as the government has provided free schooling, scholar transport, university and various social grants, it has not been able to create an environment where our people’s dignity has been restored through a good job and stable community. The opposite has occurred. We have lost all dignity, with violence increasing in our homes, streets, neighbourhoods and workplaces everywhere in South Africa. At times we resemble a frontier state.
We can focus on whether an ANC-DA coalition means Mandela’s dream for a national democratic revolution has evaporated. Or whether the marriage of convenience between the EFF and ANC, with even the MK party is a supposed black solidarity alliance. In truth, any or all of these arrangements will mean little in the absence of a plan that we all get around to — especially community, trade unions, business and political leadership — create jobs through direct domestic investment by business and the government.
We must not worry about who gets into bed with whom. We must demand a few matters. Any coalition will involve the ANC as the leading partner, and therefore it is imperative that the ANC lives up to the reality that it has let the majority of South Africans down.
All coalition discussions must be transparent; we do not want secret agreements such as sunset clauses. Any agreement must include plans that force businesses to invest in the creation of jobs in the country. The agreement must pledge various government funds such as the Public Investment Corporation to directly invest in infrastructure development in poorer areas. And finally we must have a national dialogue where people can describe their lives and talk about the South Africa they want.
Our choice is clear; either we are transfixed by these political games that feed our chauvinistic side or we use these results to be humble and involve people, while putting aside our narrow political objectives to create a better society we claim we want.
Donovan E Williams is a social commentator.