By Phakamisa Mayaba
The story goes that when Trevor Manuel first got into Nelson Mandela’s cabinet, he could barely work a PC. He must’ve been one of the privileged ones, as some of his colleagues – fresh from whatever dank cells the old regime had consigned them to – might have never seen one, let alone sat at one, and were still making do the old-fashioned way. Pen and pad, or dictating things to secretaries fresh out of exile. From the trenches to the office, out of the guerrilla fatigues into a three-piece suit, some of these guys went from listlessness in the African Bush to holding court in the ruling strata.
Even the open-minded liberal press took a dim view, questioning whether Mandela’s comrades, who almost to a man were encumbered by communist allegiances (in a world where communism was heretical) were capable – in a post-Cold War setting – of running an efficient, economically viable government. It’s a question that continues to dog government, especially when issues around economic policy arise. More so now when dilapidation and sloth are writ large on every inner city street or public facility, and avarice lurks in every public transaction.
The world is advancing at an unprecedented pace, yet the grim state of our military arsenal seems to suggest a backward regression to muskets and bayonets. For that reason, even pundits who’d cut the cadres some slack have found themselves coming down hard on the country’s increasingly sorry state of affairs. Resonating with the hardscrabble and injustice that spawned the resistance movement, most black opinionistas unequivocally and naturally rallied to the defence of the ANC’s ‘broad church’ — the now-defunct print edition of City Press among the most loyal.
It made perfect sense. With its democratic socialist leanings, the ANC way, paved with redress and black economic upliftment, was far more palatable than the IFP’s tribalism or the PAC’s call for the land. It was an unoffensive, subtle way of reining in old privilege and roping the marginalised into the formal economy, sans the startling language. Land grabs and expropriation seemed like the shortest route to the tinderbox of civil war, or agitating the aid-granting West. And the talks of reconciliation ameliorated white guilt, as many breathed a sigh of relief that if they could only comply with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, there would be pardons and no come-uppance for past sins.
No sooner had the ANC assumed power were the headlines breathing down their necks. Opinion-makers took umbrage at our equivalents to DEI. Quotas in sport became a swear word, Affirmative Action was quickly seen as a way of purging the public sector of whites, and BEE was perceived as nothing more than a feeding trough for the black elite. Reverse apartheid became a buzzword, a sitting president was reluctantly dragged to court by national rugby boss Dr Louis Luyt, and — gifted as he was — cricketer Makhanya Ntini was still haunted by accusations of being a quota player.
It was a new government, to be sure, but the rules of the game seemed the same. White men had long written the manual for the system and its structures. There are stories of ludicrous largesse being spirited away on the eve of democracy. The hamstrung black government was faced with the unenviable task of saving face with their constituency by reversing the years of imbalance without looking like it had it out for the erstwhile beneficiaries.
By now, the white voice was ratcheting up the counter-argument, with talented writers like Rian Malan, David Bullard, and even our very own R.W. Johnson dissing the revolutionary socialist path (which seemed like code for connected blacks to plunder), and punting the first-world language of merit and capability as the wand that would restore the country to its former glory. Prescriptive, smart-alec white tutelage. Why not? After all, they’d drawn the blueprint.
In front of a Biznews audience recently, the billionaire Rob Hersov echoed these thought patterns. ‘White South Africans,’ he declared, ‘excel at academics and competition, and what we need to therefore understand and acknowledge is that competing with us on merit remains a scary prospect that most black South Africans won’t support.’
In a fair and just world he might have had a point, but there was nothing just or fair about SA in the time of National Party finger-wagging. If he’d been a few shades darker, there would’ve been no privilege or money from dad for a younger Hersov. No opportunity to work with Rupert Murdoch, or a friendly ecosystem for building his empire. A black Rob Hersov during apartheid? Get the f… outta here!
The imbalances were glaring and so deeply entrenched that, standing with his white counterpart, the state-schooled African child was almost always an ill-educated, backward candidate. He spoke with a grating accent and came from schools with no microscopes or planers. At its most merciless, the NP government is said to have spent up to 15 times more on white learners than those from the townships.
Africans were earning less, and job reservation meant that that was the best they were ever going to get. Black doctors or accountants were as rare as a black pontiff, and if you were white and didn’t make it in the sea of dirt-cheap black labour, you would’ve been a junkie or a moron. On this much, even these dissenting writers agree, but they get riled up when phrases like ‘white privilege’ are brought up.
Indeed, those were the days when white industrialists ruled supreme, and black successes were hardly ever heard of. White multi-millionaires sprang up, so influential that they could rely on their financial clout to arrange clandestine meetings with the exiled ANC in Zambia, while still having the ruling government’s ear. Political credentials were unnecessary. Money talked, so their voice would always be heard, probably first. Then under apartheid, and now (despite what dissenters might try to tell you) in a time of democracy, white men continue to – in the language of the millennials – make the bag.
Elon Musk might have told Ramaphosa to go jump if when he wanted Starlink to grant 30% of its local business to previously disadvantaged groups, and Donald Trump might have put Pretoria on ice, but if there’s one person he wasn’t going to ghost, it’s one of the richest on the ‘shithole’ continent. So when Johann Rupert got word out to Washington that it’d all been a big misunderstanding, no genocide or land expropriation happening here, Potus conceded to grant Ramaphosa an audience. In turn, Ramaphosa’s team had reportedly prepared a sweeter deal for Musk’s Starlink, and Rupert, in Washington, was due to link up with the SA delegation.
The unmistakable language of white capital – clear, unstoppable, gets things rolling. Like De Klerk (not Mandela), it is Rupert, not The Buffalo, who will walk away with the credit for whatever may come of the talks. Ramaphosa’s efforts will disappear under fine prose that will whitewash his efforts. These guys may be a far cry from Afriforum, but their stance on issues like #FeesMustFall and land expropriation doesn’t do them any favours amongst people who are still pining for economic equality. It is this inability to empathise with the plight of those who’ve had the boot to their throats for generations. To walk in your brother’s shoes and really see. Hersov calls it the ‘ideological battle,’ but listen close enough and you realise it’s more a regression to old ways. The ways that things have always been between black and white.
And when you stick to those guns of ‘us versus them’, then what do you expect to find in the other corner? Julius Malema, Gayton McKenzie, even the raving Andile Mngxitama. When the more measured voices – the ones who suffer the slurs of ‘sellout’ or ‘clever blacks’, because they have seen that polarised attitudes do nothing except breed hate and suspicion – have to compete against populism and nationalism, on both sides the floor is opened wide to these separatist elements.
The unacknowledgement of the other is the reason why these elements will find justification in their provocative statements. And so you can expect to hear ‘kill the Boer’ and such chilling chants. The message to the people is clear: these guys just don’t get it, they want things to return to the times when the white men pointed and black men started digging and shovelling with an obsequious ‘Ja Baas.’
I trust the higher-ups will forgive me. This was meant to be a piece about Ramaphosa’s visit to Washington. But the instant social media reactions and the digital op-eds popping up in real time saw the story going from waiting on The Buffalo’s envoy pulling up on the immaculate White House driveway to the controversial poet Ntsiki Mazwai slamming Rupert’s showing alongside Ramaphosa. There were harsh words from various political parties, with former golfers Ernie Els and Retief Goosen stealing some of The Buffalo’s limelight.
Needless to say, ‘white monopoly capital’ came up alongside questions as to who is really running this country. Ramaphosa is not winning, if the memes are anything to go by. Still, the president did not bring along a Thabo Mbeki but a wealthy white man and a couple of white golfing pros, because perhaps he understands that nothing puts broader smiles on the face of capitalists than a few luxury gifts, a round of golf, and a black president who doesn’t mind the personal attacks. What matters is the wellbeing of SA and all who live in it, black and white. How one wishes the rest of us would learn to play like that. This is a developing story.
FEATURED IMAGE: Presidents Cyril Ramaphosa and Donald Trump during their Oval Office meeting. (The White House on YouTube)
Mr Mayaba, I admire your writing and support the main truth and thrust of your article. It is undeniable that millionaires and billionaires eclipse our politics these days, but, sonny, I think you can do better than: “White multi-millionaires sprang up, so influential that they could rely on their financial clout to arrange clandestine meetings with the exiled ANC in Zambia, while still having the ruling government’s ear.”
Why not check here? https://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/chronology-meetings-between-south-africans-and-anc-exile-1983-2000-michael-savage
Max du Preez was possibly the earliest white to contact the ANC in exile. There were hundreds, and reading this article, I could not find any billionaires in the list. I think the only mentioned (possible at the time) millionaire was Louis Luyt, who was at the time the head honcho of AE&CI and big in rugby. There were no billionaires. CR was a broke unionist for most of those years, and anyway you are talking about whites. Possibly 99% of the persons who contacted the ANC in exile were arguably white liberals, almost all of them non-politicians. The two “most likely to have succeeded” all through this list, were F van Zyl Slabbert and Alex Boraine. At that time, van Zyl Slabbert was professor of history at UCT.
So, true though your feelings may feel today, and while money money surely talked (as always), the movers and shakers in this list did not give a fig for the privilege they stood to lose for their efforts. Frankly, millionaires and billionaires mean nothing to me, and I suggest you please not credit them with more influence than they actually had.
As you say, this is an ongoing story: I am not holding my breath to see how the rich guys emerge from this sorry debacle with worldwide respect. You could argue that, in front of our eyes, those liberals who put their lives on the line through the eighties and nineties have achieved nothing, but it was not for want of trying. They kept at it for twenty years, two thirds of what the in-power ANC has taken to improve roads, rail, schools, hospitals, airlines, energy.
Sadly, it is the secretive, STILL SILENT ones who pull strings and benefit: arms dealers, big pharma, the internet billionaires. As you can see from the list referred to, business and rich people were silent to the last man and woman, all through the struggle years. it was left to fearless clergy, academics and journalists (and a goodly dollop of help from a young (Sir) Peter Hain) to do the grunt work, most of them liberals: the same very, broad “ineffectual” category we love to dump on these days.
As my elders and teachers in PMB would say to me: “ngicela ubonise inhlonipho”.
Interesting article, Phakamisa.
This is one of those remarkable events which can be interpreted from so many points of view. I heard Corne Mulder being upset that the sufferings of white victims (of crime? politics?) in South Africa did not get a more serious acknowledgement from Ramaphosa. And I heard others condemning Ramphosa for not being more assertive in trashing the “white genocide” thesis. And in a way, both points of view are valid.
Remember the movie Vantage Point, which replays the same scene over and over again (the assassination of a US President in Spain), each time from the vantage point of a different character. And then the truth of the episode turns out to share a bit of each vantage point, and actually different from all of them too. That is the nature of a dramatic event. It has many dimensions, each with some validity.
But actually, I was proud of the little team that was evidently rapidly assembled for a high-stakes White House debut, in full glare of the world media. A President, an opposition politician, a billionaire, two world-class golfers and a trade unionist (and a Cabinet Minister as backup). And none of them knew what was coming. It was performance art – no rehearsals, and you get one shot at it. If you fail, public embarrassment will be excruciating. The whole country was watching. And the implications are massive – to achieve a fair trading relationship with the mighty USA.
If the goal was to get past the Orange Nut and the media circus unscathed, and then enter the magic doors to some coherent negotiations, they succeeded masterfully.
They sacrificed a bit (acknowledging SA is a cesspool of violent crime had to be said), but the Team was all batting in the same direction, despite their internal disagreements. Ramaphosa’s gravitas was masterful, as was his ability to let the team do the playing and not hog the stage. Rupert must have done some heavy footwork behind the scenes to bring the matter to fruition, and for that, we can be thankful. Progress towards trade was made.
Does this mean that billionaires run the world? In some ways (as in Vantage Point), yes. In other ways, no. In South Africa, political power is very dispersed, and one political triumph never assures anyone of future future victories. The question, then, is: Did it perhaps set a trend in motion? Is it bigger than simply the White House jamboree? Did it take the country forward?
I argue that it will. It made the centre in SA politics stronger (moderate ANC and moderate DA). It gave Ramaphosa and Steenhuisen a rare moment to find each other as political players. It celebrated the incredible achievement that a non-racial democracy in South Africa has lasted for 30 years. It has hopefully created a platform for more moderate economic policies, which will promote investment (domestic and foreign), which is the only thing that will lift us out of the economic doldrums. And then the billionaires can be chivvied, jostled and manipulated by our democratic leaders, to make a meaningful contribution to upliftment – as Elon Musk will hopefully do.
It was indeed a peak experience. Complicated, but exhilirating.