Thembile Ndabeni
While there is a general view that there is a need to have an alternative to the ANC, and the DA for that matter, some new parties that present themselves to be an alternative are questionable from the outset.
When you say you are going to be an alternative to something that is in existence, you are not just talking about replacing it in one form but about coming up with something new.
When the likes of Songezo Zibi came out as younger leaders, compared to the ageing comrades in the ruling party, people’s hopes were high.
Though education must not be put at the centre of a political party, it is very much relevant. People pin their hopes on the likes of Zibi because of the education, knowledge, and other expertise they possess. Which is why they appeal to many people, including their presentation of how they see things and the solutions they bring.
Rise Mzansi claims to be a social democratic party, and it’s expected that it knows what that means and will abide by it.
By the way, even if they know, social democracy is two ideas of a coin and it depends which one you choose to spin. This party automatically presents itself to be honest and, therefore, open. But the first thing that raised eyebrows was when it refused to declare who the funders are. That caused shock and concern because a party that presents itself as an alternative should have nothing to hide. This was until it was discovered that the biggest funders are the Oppenheimers.
Whether one likes it or not, people are disappointed by Rise Mzansi hiding its funders. The Oppenheimers are not just ordinary capitalists but capitalists of note. Therefore, there is no way that they will fund a party that is contrary to its policy or challenge them. There’s a proverb that goes, “He who pays the piper calls the tune.”
Yet social democrats Rise Mzansi want to be perceived as biting capitalism/imperialism, which the Oppenheimers are. This brings us to the phrase that will be used to remind Rise
Mzansi when it tries to detract, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”
Simply put, when in power with funding from the Oppenheimers, Rise Mzansi will not be balanced social democrats if it does not apply that side of its ideology/system and socialist principles.
If the Oppenheimers were in favour of such principles, they would have applied them long ago. Many people are poverty-stricken because the businesses like that of the Oppenheimers extracted for themselves a mouthful from the minerals.
This is done at the expense of the workers they exploit who go home with peanuts. The concept of alienation comes in here. Workers risk their lives and become the first people to touch the mineral and then end up becoming strangers (alienated) to it.
Firstly, after touching it, it goes to the one who becomes an owner, the Oppenheimers in this context. Secondly, workers would never be able to ever afford it. That ownership by few people is also done at the expense of the citizens of the country, especially the poverty-stricken, most of whom go to bed on empty stomachs.
Those minerals are supposed to benefit the people the Oppenheimers found in this country. They are one family, but the land, riches and wealth they control and own are enough to feed the entire population of South Africa.
They employ many people to dig the minerals for them deep under the ground, yet the workers remain poor from generation to generation. It is highly expected that when in power, Rise Mzansi will rise to the occasion and satisfy the needs of its electorate and the people in general who happen to be poor. The people of colour are poor because land and wealth (economy) were ruthlessly taken away from them. The only way to address the land disparity is expropriation without compensation. Is Rise Mzansi prepared to do that without taking orders from the master? Or will it be one of the reactionaries that protect the current land ownership arrangement, the status quo, in order not to upset the master race?
Will Rise Mzansi come up with an economic policy that will address the economic disparity in the economy that is in the hands of the white minority, while the majority who make that economy are poor?
Will Rise Mzansi deal with racism that is mostly suffered by people of colour, especially Africans, mostly by white people, where its funders come from? How different would they be from puppets because to be a puppet simply means to be controlled? If that is the case, then it means Rise Mzansi is not real or fully socially democratic.
Won’t the leadership of Rise Mzansi in power be nothing else but compradore bourgeoisie puppets who take orders from the Oppenheimers?
Is Rise Mzansi the new kid on the block or new kid on the box? Must we wait for time to tell or use our relevant senses to draw a conclusion? Though both are not incorrect, can we for all fairness allow the former to supersede the latter? Be that as it is, the bottom line is, Mzansi cannot rise without the satisfaction of the downtrodden and the poor. That is because they are the bedrock of the economy, and without their support or vote no party can be in power.
How can Zibi and Rise Mzansi not be puppets of a different tune?
* Ndabeni is a former history tutor at UWC and a former teacher at Bulumko Senior Secondary School in Khayelitsha.
Cape Times