Sun Oct 23 16:24:11 SAST 2016
Plea for a 72-hour break from Fees Must Fall

Open letter to South Africa’s students‚ universities and government‚ represented by Minister in the .

There's no ideological battle in ANC alliance

By unknown | Dec 15, 2009 | COMMENTS [ 0 ]

WE ARE again being subjected to ANC alliance internal "battles". Those involved tell us it's about ideologies - one communist, the other capitalist.

WE ARE again being subjected to ANC alliance internal "battles". Those involved tell us it's about ideologies - one communist, the other capitalist.

The media, of course, go with all this without questioning. We have been duped, there is no communist versus capitalist struggle in the ANC alliance, because all the components of the alliance actually defend capitalism.

So what is the so-called battle about? To understand it one has to go beyond the words used by the "warring" factions, such as socialism, socialisation and nationalisation or the national democratic revolution.

Let's start with the call for the nationalisation of mines, led by the ANCYL.

This call seems increasingly to be about opening space for those who won in Polokwane to also get access to the mineral wealth of the country, which are currently enjoyed by the pre-Polokwane elite in cahoots with old white capital.

It seems Patrice Motsepe has understood the message, hence his reported support for nationalisation, including "socialism". Now, where have you ever seen a capitalist supporting socialism?

As expected, the ANCYL has congratulated Motsepe for his support for nationalisation. We wait to see how Motsepe and others will do a black version of Brett Kebble's support for the comrades.

The SACP has responded to the call for nationalisation by speaking in convoluted tongues. It says it wants "socialisation" that goes beyond state ownership, and warns against "state capitalism".

The easiest thing to do for communists would be to support the ANCYL and then simply go further than what they say is a limited agenda. But no, they are opposing it through sophisticated argument, hence they end up supporting the current status quo that favours the white and the co-opted black capital. Either way, capital wins and the people lose again.

Both the ANCYL and SACP, if they really cared for the working class and poor, could start by telling the government to stop the violent harassment and forced removals of communities in the platinum areas in North West and Mpumalanga. By the way, comrade Motsepe's mining company, with Anglo-Platinum, are implicated in the violence. This is happening with the support of the government.

The state-owned enterprises don't benefit the poor and working class, from Eskom through to Transnet and the SABC.

Shouldn't we therefore worry that any further extension of access to resources by the current government, co-managed with capitalist-communists, will be of no benefit to the majority?

Other nations such as Bolivia and Venezuela are using their mineral resources to address poverty and hunger. These nations are committed to ending capitalism in the long run, and their policies are slanted in the interest of the majority, and tax and appropriate private capital. Unfortunately not so for South Africa.

Now even Cosatu's Zwelinzima Vavi is hatching a scheme with a representative of capital, Bobby Godsell "to save jobs". Actually, this is a scheme to save capital.

According to their proposal, management must consider cuts in bonuses and increments, and workers must also consider lowering the cost of labour, that means not asking for increases or bonuses, and even taking lower wages.

The global economic crisis was created by capitalists and shows the limits of the system. Why must underpaid and indebted workers be burdened with saving capital?


Login OR Join up TO COMMENT