×

We've got news for you.

Register on SowetanLIVE at no cost to receive newsletters, read exclusive articles & more.
Register now

Giant dilemma for Msholozi

Which leader does Zuma aspire to be?

IN A lecture on President Jacob Zuma last week his deputy, Kgalema Motlanthe, made a remarkable statement.

"Zuma stands on the shoulders of giants who came before him," Motlanthe said, obviously trying hard to convince himself before he could even dream of swaying his audience.

Motlanthe would have made you squirm if you knew the meaning associated with the "shoulders of giants" phrase.

The phrase can be traced to well-known scientist Isaac Newton, who in 1676 wrote to Robert Hook, a fellow scientist with whom he had a dispute over optical discoveries.

Newton wrote thus to Hook: "If I have seen further, it's by standing on the shoulders of giants."

Business strategist Jeremy Kourdi recently stated in a management book that historians believe that Newton's letter was not a statement of modesty, but a sarcastic attack on the curmudgeonly Hook, who was short and hunchbacked.

Kourdi further wrote: "Whatever the sentiment behind Newton's remark, the idea has lasted that, in maths and science, progress is made incrementally by methodologically building on discoveries and [the] insight of others who came before".

It was with the Newton background in mind that one began to question what Motlanthe meant when he said, "Zuma stands on the shoulders of giants who came before him".

When pondering this one, of course, takes into account that Zuma is not a scientist. The giants referred to could only have been political leaders - in and outside the ANC.

One can only evaluate the outcome of his standing on the shoulders of others from a political point of view.

But there are so many questions about Zuma.

Is he making a sound contribution to our society and politics from the vantage of standing on the shoulders of giants?

If Zuma is indeed standing on the shoulders of giants, what does he see? Can he see further?

Does it give him better sight of what needs to be done to improve the lives of those often referred to as "our people"?

Does he make some discoveries on how our society could be improved?

Does it help him in governing our republic?

Is he methodologically and incrementally building on the legacy of the giants who came before him?

Perhaps more importantly, who exactly are the giants on whose shoulders Zuma stands?

There are two types of giants in Africa: the big looters of public resources - who unfortunately have been in the majority - and the selfless leaders Motlanthe was referring to.

Zuma knows which category of leaders he should belong to.

Back in 1989, during the secret talks between ANC representatives and a group of Afrikaners in London, Zuma, who had been invited by Thabo Mbeki, demonstrated he knew who of the two types of giants he would like to be in future.

In one meeting the participants were worried about the violence that was engulfing parts of South Africa, particularly in KwaZulu-Natal, Zuma's home province.

FW de Klerk had just been elected president. Violence and hit squads were prevalent.

In his book, The Endgame: Secret Talks and the End of Apartheid, Willie Esterhuyse refers to Zuma's profound observation of the African situation.

"We have a history of blood," Zuma told participants. He further observed: "Africa has a disease. There are too many 'one man shows'. And a lot of corruption. Military coups give Africa a bad name. How can the military be controlled?" Esterhuyse writes that no one answered.

Zuma had obviously hit the nail on the head. His diagnosis of Africa's troubles was beyond doubt. He knew the direction South Africa was not supposed to take. He knew that military coups, a "lot of corruption" and giving Africa a bad name were the stuff to be avoided in a future democratic South Africa.

With that kind of insight he was in a position to be the giant on whose shoulders many others were supposed to stand to have a better view of how the future should look.

Yet, given his conduct after he joined the government, Zuma seemed to be a symptom of the disease he diagnosed in 1989. And this was a deliberate choice on his part.

I am not one of those who believe that Zuma cannot distinguish between wrong and right.

Unless anyone suggests that Esterhuyse was lying in making the observations he made about Zuma's statement, one is compelled to believe that Zuma meant well.

In fact, he knew why he was in the struggle in the first place - not for personal gain, but for all South Africans.

The "lot of corruption" , the military coups and the "one man shows" he was referring to were instituted by former liberation heroes after many African countries gained independence in and after 1959.

Why then is Zuma seemingly standing on the shoulders of the leaders he once condemned?

Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.