Dailymaverick logo

Opinionistas

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed are not that of Daily Maverick.....

Why South Africa’s democracy is working better than the US

The American electoral system exacerbates rather than diffuses societal cleavages, while South African politicians are getting used to concepts which have become increasingly foreign on Capitol Hill – coalition and consensus.

America, home to 330 million people, is not only the largest economy in the world, but also the most influential actor in global economics, defence, culture and politics. The policies formulated by its Congress and executed by its government impact eight billion people worldwide, regardless of whether they are US citizens.

So why is its democracy so deeply undemocratic?

This is a controversial assertion, especially in a country that many believe to be “the world’s greatest democracy”. While the US has the oldest continuous democracy, dating back to 1776, majority rule is not a defining feature of its system. In fact, the idea that 160 million voters (roughly half the population) directly decide who governs is misleading. David Schultz, a political science professor at Hamline University, believes that in the November presidential elections, “maybe 150,000 voters will be decisive”. How can this be?

The root of this issue lies in the US electoral system, which is governed by a constitution drafted in the late 18th century. Adam Tooze, professor of history at Columbia University, explains that the US territorial expansion in the 19th century, when it aggressively incorporated much of North America, left a legacy of unevenly sized states. This produced a sprawling federal system where the Electoral College, rather than the popular vote, determined the presidency. The Electoral College was originally designed to balance influence between large and small states, but today it ensures that a small number of swing states have a disproportionate impact on the election outcome.

For example, between 2000 and 2016, 38 states consistently voted for the same political party in every election, meaning that the result came down to just a few swing states and, within them, even fewer battleground counties. In the most extreme examples, two presidents – George W Bush in 2000 and Donald Trump in 2016 – were elected despite losing the national popular vote. Famously, Bush won the entire national election by a mere 537 votes in Florida.

In the 2024 election, just seven swing states – Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – will likely decide the election. The decisions of just a few hundred thousand voters in these states will determine whether the world must endure another four years of Trumpism, or Bidenomics under Kamala Harris.

Furthermore, the “first-past-the-post” system used in the US intensifies divisions by making most congressional districts non-competitive. Over the past 20 years, gerrymandering and political sorting have ensured that most voters live in districts where one party dominates, rendering their votes almost irrelevant in national elections. This contrasts starkly with countries like South Africa, where a proportional representation system ensures broader representation.

South Africa’s proportional representation already showing economic dividends


South Africa’s electoral system, established by the 1995 Constitution, is designed to avoid the concentration of power in a polarised society. Following the ANC’s most recent poor showing in the May elections, this system forced the party into a power-sharing coalition.

Already the economic dividends of this business-friendly coalition government are starting to show. Since the elections, South Africa has attracted major investments from multinationals like Anglo American and Qatar Airways, and ArcelorMittal has reversed its decision to close steel mills that support 80,000 jobs. 

The rand, stocks and government bonds have rallied, with South African sovereign bonds outperforming all its emerging-market peers in a show of investor enthusiasm. CEOs are enthused by the cordial relations with the government as well as pledges to allow the private sector to help run the country’s struggling ports and freight-rail network. 

Read more: With four weeks to go, Kamala Harris leads US polls while Elon Musk goes Dark MAGA for Trump

While the positive sentiment is welcome, there is no quick fix. Unemployment and inequality remain sky high, growth is still moribund, and impediments to service delivery are structural. Yet the reality remains that this coalition government, which at least in sentiment is focused on getting the economy going, would never have been possible if South Africa had a similar electoral system to that of the US. That type of system exacerbates rather than diffuses societal cleavages. Instead, South African politicians are now having to get used to those concepts which have become increasingly foreign on Capitol Hill – coalition and consensus.  

No electoral system is perfect. Coalition governments, formed because of proportional representation, can often result in systemic instability. Many naysayers, including Jonny Steinberg of Yale University, predicted precisely this before the May elections. However, each democracy must pick its own poison.  

It is fitting that at the helm of South Africa’s coalition is President Cyril Ramaphosa, who played a pivotal role in drafting the 1995 Constitution. Though it is only just under 100 days since the formation of the coalition government, the benefits of a more representative democracy are already evident. Unlike in the supposed “greatest democracy on Earth”, South African voters can feel confident that their political system is designed to reflect their preferences and plurality of views rather than serve as a race to the bottom of polarisation and alienation. DM

Categories: