Vices of pledging allegiance to a shattered ANC

The recent political events in South Africa have brought to light the question of how political leaders continue to pledge allegiance to the ANC despite the party’s numerous wrongdoings. 

A classic example is when a parliamentary committee was set up several years ago to investigate the exorbitant cost of building former president Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla residence. Despite the facts, MPs from the ruling ANC party defended the corruption and ignored the evidence. Recently, in his debut appearance during a Q&A session, the newly appointed deputy president, Paul Mashatile, defended the ANC’s decision to protect President Cyril Ramaphosa from scrutiny regarding the Phala Phala saga. 

This defence echoes the ANC’s past actions and highlights the party’s disregard for transparency and accountability. How is it that a party that was once viewed as the beacon of hope for democracy in South Africa has fallen so far from grace?

To answer this question, we can turn to John Gaventa’s theory of power based on Steven Lukes three dimensions of power. According to Gaventa, power is not just about domination and control but also about quiescence and acquiescence. He argues that people can be complicit in their oppression by accepting the status quo and failing to challenge power relations. In other words, people can be oppressed not just by those who hold power but also by their acceptance of that power.

The ANC has been in power since the end of apartheid in 1994. During this time, the party has been accused of numerous wrongdoings, including corruption, nepotism, and cronyism. Despite these allegations, the ANC has maintained its grip on power, and its members and leaders have defended the party at all costs.

One explanation for this phenomenon is what Gaventa calls the “veil of ignorance“. This refers to the idea that people may be unaware of the full extent of their oppression or the wrongdoings of those in power. In the case of the ANC, many members and supporters may be unaware of or choose to ignore the party’s wrongdoing.

Another explanation is what Gaventa calls “civil acquiescence“. This refers to the idea that people may accept the status quo because they believe there is no alternative or that the alternative would be worse. This can occur when people feel powerless or believe political action is futile or ineffective. In the case of the ANC, its members and supporters may believe that the party is the only option for democracy in South Africa and that the alternative would be much worse — or they fear losing the benefits of the current alignment.

These explanations are not mutually exclusive. For example, the veil of ignorance may contribute to civil acquiescence, because people unaware of their oppression may be more likely to accept the status quo.

The ANC’s ability to maintain power despite its wrongdoing may also be attributed to Stockholm syndrome. This is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages emotionally bond with their captors. In the case of the ANC, its members and supporters may feel a sense of loyalty and attachment to the party, even when it is acting against their interests.

So how can this cycle of quiescence and acquiescence be broken? One of the critical contributions of Gaventa’s theory is his emphasis on the agency of the oppressed and the importance of resistance to power. He argues that those subject to oppressive power relations have agency and the capacity to act and that resistance is necessary for social change.

Gaventa suggests that breaking the cycle of quiescence and acquiescence requires a raising awareness of the oppressive power structures and encouraging oppressed people to challenge and resist these structures. This can involve education, dialogue and the creation of alternative sources of power.

Another important aspect of breaking the cycle is collective action and solidarity among oppressed people. By working together and supporting each other, they can increase their power and effectiveness in challenging oppressive structures.

It is also important to create spaces for the voices and perspectives of the oppressed to be heard and valued. This can involve promoting diversity and inclusion in decision-making processes and amplifying the voices of marginalised groups.

Zimkhitha Manyana lectures international relations at the University of the Witwatersrand.The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Mail & Guardian.