The relationship between the ANC and the DA in the government of national unity (GNU) has all the hallmarks of a new marriage.
These include the merging of two complicated families with their dynamics, the prevalence of “what will the people say” syndrome, and occasional words and actions that make each partner doubt the commitment of the other in the relationship.
Further, the parties entered the relationship for wrong but potentially sustainable reasons. The DA wanted to prevent the ANC from falling into the wrong hands. The ANC did not want to appear as though swayed by either of its arch-rivals to the left or right. So, they thought polygamy was the way to go.
Nonetheless, they are married now. Khethile khethile (one’s choice is one’s choice), as the elders say when people get married and want to cast their eyes elsewhere.
Complicated families
Respect in the ANC is earned through acts of bravery, courage, fearlessness, resoluteness, clarity of ideological standpoint, whatever that means, and solidarity, among other things, real or perceived.
They are very selective about how these should apply though.
It is difficult to pursue a coherent stance on many things in this sense. As both obeying democratic centralism and defying it at times may be seen as good by internal stakeholders.
The DA has its own contentions for its soul. It pursues a controversial mix of policies that advance ultra-liberalism while staying aloof to transformation imperatives.
Going to bed with the ANC following the recent elections must have added interesting dynamics to the DA. Those who represent the party in government will both be celebrated and jealously guarded for any signs of “selling out”, in typical ANC fashion.
The trust levels DA ministers and deputies may have enjoyed will certainly decline and umadamme has made her office an equivalent of the ANC secretary-general’s office now that the leader is in government. At that, she has apportioned to herself, the role of chief guardian of both the content of deals the DA makes and the optics thereof to the internal and perhaps funder gaze.
What will the people say?
These realities have direct consequences for the choices of the ANC and the DA. Although the brand of the DA has come to be associated with good governance through a combination of its election campaigns and particular reports, it struggles to escape being labelled as a denialist of the legacies of apartheid and colonialism.
For that reason and its seemingly confirmatory behaviour at times, the party is often labelled as racist and only concerned about the interests of white people.
As such, leaders of the DA face two contradictory processes, the need to show their fellow leaders that they remain true to the dominant brand of liberal politics while simultaneously anxious about backlashes, especially from social media. It does not want to be cowering to the ANC beyond limits and wants to be seen defending its key constituency even post the GNU.
Likewise, some small group in the ANC is aware that the internal logics of liberation politics no longer hold water to retain its key constituency, hence the need for reform. Yet, leaders know that the elite-centric processes of attaining and remaining in office within the party necessarily compel them to pander to fellow elite concerns and values. Add to that entrenched political economic interests or alleged patronage networks behind the veil of formal institutions, and the problems become more pronounced.
Despite these complications, and as many of us expected, the ANC chose a government of national unity and formed a coalition that included the DA as a more stable path for SA in the short term.
For its part, the ANC made this move after its first best scenario did not work out, which was to cobble together a coalition with smaller parties. I argued that the GNU was the most logical thing to do for an organisation that wanted to manage perceptions about the policy trajectory of SA and concerns about “selling out” simultaneously. That is why the party went on to broaden the circle even after securing a deal among the initial founding members of the GNU.
That the parties to its left and right compelled it to choose despite its reluctance is a function of factors beyond its control. The DA on its part chose the GNU not for its sake but to prevent what it called a doomsday coalition.
But now that they are here, the parties need to find their love languages and pressure points and start the work of truly building a sustainable polygamous marriage. They will need to increasingly focus on what needs to be done to build a truly united SA based on true inclusion.
- Dr Mtimka is the acting director of the Raymond Mhlaba Centre for Governance and Leadership and a lecturer at Nelson Mandela University. He writes in his personal capacity
OPINION | Dear ANC and DA, you’re married, now act like it
Parties entered the relationship for wrong but potentially sustainable reasons
Image: GCIS
The relationship between the ANC and the DA in the government of national unity (GNU) has all the hallmarks of a new marriage.
These include the merging of two complicated families with their dynamics, the prevalence of “what will the people say” syndrome, and occasional words and actions that make each partner doubt the commitment of the other in the relationship.
Further, the parties entered the relationship for wrong but potentially sustainable reasons. The DA wanted to prevent the ANC from falling into the wrong hands. The ANC did not want to appear as though swayed by either of its arch-rivals to the left or right. So, they thought polygamy was the way to go.
Nonetheless, they are married now. Khethile khethile (one’s choice is one’s choice), as the elders say when people get married and want to cast their eyes elsewhere.
Complicated families
Respect in the ANC is earned through acts of bravery, courage, fearlessness, resoluteness, clarity of ideological standpoint, whatever that means, and solidarity, among other things, real or perceived.
They are very selective about how these should apply though.
It is difficult to pursue a coherent stance on many things in this sense. As both obeying democratic centralism and defying it at times may be seen as good by internal stakeholders.
The DA has its own contentions for its soul. It pursues a controversial mix of policies that advance ultra-liberalism while staying aloof to transformation imperatives.
Going to bed with the ANC following the recent elections must have added interesting dynamics to the DA. Those who represent the party in government will both be celebrated and jealously guarded for any signs of “selling out”, in typical ANC fashion.
The trust levels DA ministers and deputies may have enjoyed will certainly decline and umadamme has made her office an equivalent of the ANC secretary-general’s office now that the leader is in government. At that, she has apportioned to herself, the role of chief guardian of both the content of deals the DA makes and the optics thereof to the internal and perhaps funder gaze.
What will the people say?
These realities have direct consequences for the choices of the ANC and the DA. Although the brand of the DA has come to be associated with good governance through a combination of its election campaigns and particular reports, it struggles to escape being labelled as a denialist of the legacies of apartheid and colonialism.
For that reason and its seemingly confirmatory behaviour at times, the party is often labelled as racist and only concerned about the interests of white people.
As such, leaders of the DA face two contradictory processes, the need to show their fellow leaders that they remain true to the dominant brand of liberal politics while simultaneously anxious about backlashes, especially from social media. It does not want to be cowering to the ANC beyond limits and wants to be seen defending its key constituency even post the GNU.
Likewise, some small group in the ANC is aware that the internal logics of liberation politics no longer hold water to retain its key constituency, hence the need for reform. Yet, leaders know that the elite-centric processes of attaining and remaining in office within the party necessarily compel them to pander to fellow elite concerns and values. Add to that entrenched political economic interests or alleged patronage networks behind the veil of formal institutions, and the problems become more pronounced.
Despite these complications, and as many of us expected, the ANC chose a government of national unity and formed a coalition that included the DA as a more stable path for SA in the short term.
For its part, the ANC made this move after its first best scenario did not work out, which was to cobble together a coalition with smaller parties. I argued that the GNU was the most logical thing to do for an organisation that wanted to manage perceptions about the policy trajectory of SA and concerns about “selling out” simultaneously. That is why the party went on to broaden the circle even after securing a deal among the initial founding members of the GNU.
That the parties to its left and right compelled it to choose despite its reluctance is a function of factors beyond its control. The DA on its part chose the GNU not for its sake but to prevent what it called a doomsday coalition.
But now that they are here, the parties need to find their love languages and pressure points and start the work of truly building a sustainable polygamous marriage. They will need to increasingly focus on what needs to be done to build a truly united SA based on true inclusion.
OPINION | GNU presents parties with a chance to create policies to benefit the masses
THEMBA SEPOTOKELE | DA leaders muddy waters every time they speak about GNU
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos