Daily Maverick
Dailymaverick logo

South Africa

South Africa

Critical that a national dialogue does not just involve South Africa’s elites (Part Two)

Critical that a national dialogue does not just involve South Africa’s elites (Part Two)
Raymond Suttner
By Raymond Suttner
15 Jan 2025
Facebook
0
To involve large sections of the population, especially the poorest of the poor, you have to take into account their location, their social conditions, the character of their grievances and find ways of giving them a voice and a hearing.

Part Two in a three-part series


Read Part One here


In building a common vision (if that becomes part of the goals of the national dialogue), we will not just have a set of ideas on which we agree, but a series of empirical problems that have to be addressed in order to ensure that the common vision can become a reality in practice.

We do already have common visions in the Constitution, which is a document that is supposed to bind all South Africans. We have also seen a number of preliminary documents prior to the adoption of the Constitution, in the negotiation process and earlier, notably in the case of the ANC and its allies advancing the Freedom Charter.

But it has often been remarked that while the Freedom Charter does articulate a series of demands, it is not a plan or a blueprint for remedying the problems that it articulates. 

There’s nothing wrong with seeking a common vision, but a common vision is not a plan or a substitute for remedying the problems that beset people throughout South Africa, in some cases both the rich and the poor, although the capacity of the rich to deal with the problems is greater than that of the poor. In some cases, these are problems that purely affect the poor.

If we focus on a vision while bypassing the actual problems, it can dent confidence in the process. At this moment Rand Water in addressing the problem of unpaid water is targeting the poor. It has not said who owes what, whether the residents of informal settlements owe more than some big companies and others.

It is interesting that at the time that we are talking about a common vision, one has an action by the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (Cogta) dismissing 250,000 workers in low-paid, community jobs with very little notice. People who have sought permanent jobs have now got no jobs at all.

Thus one has a situation where one of the elements of commonality that might well be developed would be security of employment of all people in South Africa. That has come under attack even before the process of a national dialogue has been embarked on.

But other issues need to be discussed, and some have been raised by government leaders, former government leaders like president Thabo Mbeki, foundations created in the name of figures who played a distinguished role in the Struggle for freedom, religious figures, trade unionists, business, educationists and others.

It is vital in a process like this if people want it to succeed, to understand the place of the “great thinkers”. It is very difficult to initiate a “national dialogue” that is sustainable and whose work will take off and endure. At this point what is needed is not grand ideas, but trying to get in touch with those who used to be at the centre of mass politics (or their contemporary equivalents) and hear what they say and build ideas from there.

Many who used to do that have lost their appetite for popular politics, but without working carefully and with unrelenting dedication from the ground, no one will remember this idea in a few years’ time.

Processes of the national dialogue


How will it be determined “what happens” in the process as a whole? If there are different parts/aspects, how will these interface or join with each other?

How (and where) will these meetings be conducted? What efforts will be made, if any, to ensure that this notion is realised in a way that encompasses the people of South Africa with due regard to and respect for religious affiliation, gender, ethnic qualities, geographic location, sexual orientation and other features of our social make-up?

How will it give a sense of participating – in practice – as part of a process that can lead to change and fulfilment of the aspirations of those who want to take part in it?

I have been asking these questions for some months and no one has responded, not meaning necessarily directly to me, but in official statements, in the course of laying out their understanding of what the national dialogue ought to entail.

Are these points so obviously irrelevant or founded on wrong bases and thus deserving no acknowledgement or contestation? The truth is that government statements are now driving all processes in a way that is ensuring that what ought to be national and indeed popular-driven, is state-centred.

The various foundations have issued statements which indicate that they will be part of a government-initiated process. That doesn’t mean that they’re part of the government, but it seems to suggest from the statements that most of them have made that they will be satisfied with something different from that which I am suggesting here – as necessary to make it credible.

Even if a foundation is created in the name of any one of the heroic figures of the Struggle, that is not true of their legacies. Almost all the heroic figures would have looked at the conditions of the time and not simply given answers but asked questions on how to move forward.

There are, alternatively, statements that suggest there will be efforts to involve everyone, and if that is envisaged, those efforts need to be articulated and elaborated to the public at large.

The process seems now to be in the hands of Deputy President Paul Mashatile, a man who knows from his experience in the liberation Struggle against apartheid that there are processes which can exclude, and processes in which he participated at an earlier stage, which involved large sections of the population.

And in order to involve large sections of the population, especially the poorest of the poor, you have to take into account their location, their social conditions, the character of the grievances they have and find ways of giving them a voice and a hearing.

So far we have heard very little – a previously scheduled meeting in December was postponed to some – thus far unknown – time in 2025. No one has told us more. 

The entire process, long before the actual dialogue(s) begin, needs much more communication and listening to voices from the ground even if these need to be elicited through careful campaigns in communities, with common and distinct needs. DM

This article first appeared on Creamer Media’s website: polity.org.za

Raymond Suttner is an emeritus professor at Unisa, who spent over 11 years as a political prisoner. He was in the leadership of the UDF, ANC and SACP, but broke away at the time of the Jacob Zuma rape trial.

Categories:

Tags: