Black South Africans of all communities need to have honest conversations about communal values, behaviours and aspects of culture deemed acceptable — but that undermine individual and collective development.
Is shouting slogans, singing “revolutionary” songs, blaming the past, conspiracies and other groups for all problems the criteria for political, traditional and religious leadership? Will continuously supporting violent, military, fake “revolutionaries” and village-idiot leaders, who never managed anything in their lives, the type who have elsewhere plunged African countries into failed states, civil war and mass skills flight to Western countries, miraculously deliver nirvana?
The quality of leadership is the key ingredient above mineral resources, abundant land and financial capital that determines whether countries move from begging-bowl poverty to industrial powerhouse. Poor leadership is the main reason most African countries have remained poor since Liberia became the first African country to become independent in 1847, while their peers who were also colonised such as Singapore or South Korea, and more recently Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, have caught up with developed countries in the past 50 years.
Sadly, Africans across the continent, and here at home, continue to embrace leaders who are violent, narcissistic, psychopathic, arrogant, corrupt, dishonest, narrow-minded and blame-shifting — and then expect economic miracles, social peace and stability. The flawed criteria for political leadership in many communities is to sing liberation songs, shout slogans, and blame apartheid and colonialism, foreign Africans and Western capitalists.
Political “leaders” are embraced who have never worked in real life outside politics or managed anything, not even a spaza shop, which means given that they never worked in the real economy, they do not understand how their country's and the world's economies work.
Must incompetent, corrupt and violent leaders be supported just because they are black and share ethnicity or language, harms the interests and future of those black people who support them?
Furthermore, must incompetent, corrupt and violent leaders be supported just because they are black and share ethnicity or language, harms the interests and future of those black people who support them? Should we not like in Japan, South Korea and China, hero-worship entrepreneurs who produce new products and who do not sponge off the state and politics?
Entrepreneurs who operate outside the patronage of politics or the state, who have started successful businesses and built durable institutions, have a much bigger positive affect on the lives of ordinary citizens than politicians who have never managed anything outside politics and the state. Entrepreneurs manufacture new products, provide new services, create opportunities and employment, not only for those who work for them or supply services to them, but for the broader local and global economy. They create value for individuals, communities and society.
Should development solutions that have failed everywhere else since Liberia’s independence in 1847 be embraced? Zimbabwe-style land expropriation without compensation which collapsed that country, failed pseudo-Marxist-Leninist statist economic solutions that impoverished other populist liberation movement-dominated African countries and anti-business, anti-entrepreneurial and anti-intellectual capital are wildly embraced.
Intellectual capital is at the heart of economic growth, industrialisation and development. The countries that moved from poverty to developed status aggressively pursued education, knowledge and wide reading as a key part of their development path.
Should we accept mass anti-intellectualism, which is symbolised by the negative term “clever blacks” for those who are broad-minded, slogans to substitute for evidence-based policies, and viewing “decolonisation” as closing down technical higher education institutions, artisanship and rejecting a focus on mathematics, science and technology, because they are supposedly “Western”, but which are the basis of all modern economic growth, development and industrialisation?
Should disorder, not following social rules and lawlessness be excused because apartheid and colonialism are to blame? No poverty reduction, employment creation or business creation can be fostered in lawlessness and not having consideration for others. For example, should those protesting for better services, infrastructure and jobs be allowed to burn public infrastructure and companies and be violent to others, without being held accountable because they are black, are led by “black” organisations and are protesting for their rights?Should corruption by leaders be tolerated because the apartheid and colonial leaders were also corrupt?
No development is possible without widely accepted rule of law, moral values and individual behaviour that respect others. All cultures evolve. China dissolved the emperorship — is anti-developmental for them. Should we accept African and black cultural aspects that are violent to others, denigrate women, promote unconstitutional values and undermine development?
The Japanese, Vietnamese and Germans partnered in development with their former conquerors, the US. Israel took German funding, support and partnerships immediately after World War 2 to develop. Why should we not embrace inclusive development — involving all of South Africa’s communities, the former oppressed and former oppressors?
Colonialism and apartheid were horrific to oppressed people, and the psychological, material and social capital legacies remain. Resorting to victimhood, even if it is legitimate, crushes hope, self and collective agency, and seeing opportunities. Should we not encourage a mindset change that encourages self-sufficiency, and individual and community self-help?
Of course the apartheid state supported poor whites in one way or another. But should we continue to support BEE that has empowered only a few politically connected black and white individuals, and not look at more imaginative empowerment models — such as getting companies to improve black education, support housing and non-political entrepreneurs already in business?
• William Gumede is associate professor, School of Governance, University of the Witwatersrand, and author of Restless Nation: Making Sense of Troubled Times (Tafelberg)
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.