How many chances does a party need to prove itself? In the face of dissatisfaction, much unhappiness and agitation on the part of the masses expressed in service delivery protests and the inroads made by the main opposition party in black communities, the ANC in the form of the ANCYL is stepping up its rhetoric to appeal to the masses. But then the ANC has always been a party of rhetoric; and, the rhetoric has, in the past, worked wonders. The agitation expressed in communities and threats of greater opposition strength are signs that South African masses are now beginning to question their loyalty to the ANC.
What is the ANC’s response? Rhetoric! Rhetoric! And more rethoric! How does the ANC, in the form of the ANCYL respond? Nationalisation and expropriation without compensation! A policy position, clearly, not in line with the ideology and politics of the sitting president of the country.
Instead of being easily impressionable, we must, at this stage of our evolution as a nation, begin to ask ourselves searching questions. Was it not the ANC and, in particular, the ANCYL, that sold us Ntate Zuma as a people’s person? Was it not the ANCYL that convinced us that Ntate Zuma is the one we have been waiting for; a leader in tune with the pulse and heartbeat of the poor and economically excluded black majority; in contrast to his predecessor, presented as “aloof, stubborn, intellectual and English?” Was Ntate Zuma not presented by the ANCYL as the type with the wherewithal to listen to people and the capacity to usher in a new era of delivery, accelerated transformation, equality and peace?
Given the ANCs capacity to raise and dash hopes we must now probe: on what basis should we embrace the current nationalisation rhetoric as an expression of deep commitment to a people? Is this not another trick played on us? Is this not another ploy on the part of the ANC to entrench its hold on power?