24th July 2002
1. INTRODUCTION & GREETINGS
On behalf of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the South African National Civic Organisation (SANCO), I extend SANCO`s revolutionary greetings to the Central Committee of the SACP, the delegates to the 11th Congress of the SACP, guests from the Alliance, the President of the African National Congress and the South African government, Comrade Thabo Mbeki, the President of the Congress of South African Trade Unions, Comrade Willy Madisha, and all honoured guests from abroad and from South Africa.
Let me first begin by extending SANCO`s unequivocal support for the Solidarity Campaign being launched at this Congress for the release of the Cuban revolutionaries who are languishing in the self-appointed `World`s Policeman`s` prison, comrades Rodriguez, Llort, Sechwrert, Nordelo, and Salazar. The NEC of SANCO when briefed and addressed by the Comrade Angel Villa of the Cuban Embassy, of the unjust imprisonment of Cuban nationals who were only defending the peace and security of their country, we were as disgusted as the SACP is. Therefore it is very simple for us to join the SACP in their Solidarity Campaign for these Cuban heroes and revolutionaries !
Let me also take the opportunity to state that one is very excited to address the revolutionary and intellectual bourgeoisie of the National Democratic Revolution. Your deliberations and outcomes at this Congress is keenly awaited by the cadres in SANCO. Your analysis of the current conjuncture together with strategic insight is always required. The left shall always be the source of strength to ensure that we implement the Freedom Charter and ensure that the National Democratic Revolution (NDR) remains on track.
2. THE WORKING CLASS IS THE LEADING CLASS THEN LET US USE THE LANGUAGE OF THE WORKING CLASS
When Comrade Fidel Castro addressed the South African parliament in 1998, the same time that the defender of racist democracy, Tony Leon, chose to boycott his visit, he made a point that has stuck in one`s mind ever since. One recalls, Comrade Castro revealing statistic after statistic, like how many kilometres of tarred roads there were in the entire continent of Africa, and what a large percentage of those roads were found in South Africa, or the mortality and life expectancy rates in Africa and South Africa, etc. And then at the end, he stated, in his unique Castro way, "with all these developmental problems, people still want discuss macro-economics."
In Cuba, the legend of Che Guevara lives on. He remains both an inspiration and to the disgust of imperialists all over, a living role model. Interestingly, it is not for Comrade Che`s mastery of political and economic jargon that he remains an icon, rather for the simple and real way he expressed communism. One thinks that it was Comrade Che who said, "The reason for the Revolution is Love." One is sure that poets like our President, and Comrade Jeremy will no doubt given a better philosophical analysis of his statement than I could ever do. Closer to home, one will make the intellectual leap of faith and state that the reason that Comrade Hani was so loved was because he made the religion of socialism and communism a real concept as opposed to an intellectual discourse.
Quite often mere mortals like myself and the thousands of community activists are scared of socialism and communism because Party activists seem to be more intent on impressing with their knowledge. However, one is not meaning that there should be a dumbing-down, or there should be no class analysis of both the local and international balance of forces. But, the discussion should not remain there, rather it should move to how people can change their lives, without overthrowing society. If the only way I can ensure a better life is if I have to overthrow the United States and every capitalist in the world, then I will most probably leave that struggle to somebody else ! The role of the Party, and the entire Alliance is to ensure that majority of South Africans, in particular the poor, are looking at all sorts of different ways to ensure that their lives improve, and that the institutions in the country are assisted, and where failing are disciplined. The poor must drive the interests of development and it must ensure that the democratic instruments established are used for that aim and that aim alone.
3. THE REVOLUTION IS DEAD! , LONG LIVE THE REVOLUTION!
In as much as the overwhelming majority of those present in this hall openly and without apology believe in Socialism and Communism. One shall also offer that this same majority also believe in the National Democratic Revolution (NDR). The Revolutionary Alliance, of the SACP, the ANC, COSATU, and SANCO, is not an alliance of convenience or as some like to contend, an alliance of tactical naivety. Rather it is regarded as the best vehicle to ensure that the goals of the National Democratic Revolution are attained. However, if the goals of the NDR have been attained then the reason for the Alliance remains no more. We have not attained the goals and objective of the NDR, and therefore the Alliance remains as relevant as when it was first conceived in thought.
However, it is SANCO`s view that we have not allowed the Alliance to adapt to the changing nature of the political and social environment. We have not analysed our relative strengths and weaknesses in the different arenas of society, the pressures these arena come to bear upon us and our responsibility within those areas as well as within the Alliance.
Let me state unequivocally that for us in SANCO that we are a part of the Alliance, except not in name. Maybe it is because Tripartite sounds a great deal better than Quadruple, who knows?
The relative weaknesses and strengths of SANCO is a clear and direct reflection of the state of the grassroots Congress movement. The ANC courageously and openly admitted in their National General Council (NGC) of how their local structures were suffering. We expect both COSATU and the SACP, particularly since the SACP is now a mass-based party, to examine their strength and growth at local level. From SANCO`s perspective we have an interesting conundrum, we are very strong at local level and relatively weak at national level. That is a part of the reason for the lack of discipline that was expressed by some national leaders who when faced with being disciplined by the Provinces of SANCO chose to resign and fight in the media.
This brings one to another salient observation of our Alliance. It is imperative that our Alliance is a living Alliance particularly at local level. And that does not just mean that we have Alliance meetings at local level. Rather we must be the driving force of ensuring active participation of the poor and the beneficiaries of development in every development programme that is envisaged and being implemented. Each and every time there is no consultation or no active participation by the general mass, it is a direct indictment of the lack of responsibility and leadership of the critical mass, the Alliance. We cannot hide from the responsibility that the entire movement is responsible for turning the wheels of transformation. We should not be competing for the space in the mass media. And let us face it, that the juiciest stories are not the Alliance marching to the Israeli and American embassies in solidarity with Comrade Arafat, rather when it is one Alliance member disagreeing with the other. Let us not play to that peanut gallery!
To paraphrase the SACP Gauteng Provincial Secretary, Comrade Vish, the SACP should not be a left DA. More especially, there should not be any supposed left opposition in the Alliance. How can we have a vehicle with four wheels and expect each wheel to move in a different direction? At any rate the rules of our road are clear, "All Vehicles Must Keep Left !"
We believe that all members of the Alliance have openly stated that we all believe in the same objectives, the NDR, the Freedom Charter, and the RDP, then when faced with alternative and sometimes differing policy choices, we should not transcend our discussions on whether we still maintain our belief in our objectives, rather we should discuss the demerits and merits of these choices, and agree on a single choice. One has the utmost respect and confidence in Comrade Blade`s ability, but let me openly state that if I had to leave Comrade Blade alone in a room with George W Bush for an entire year, Bush will not convert to Marx and Lenin, and of course Comrade Blade would never become a disciple of Adam Smith. Our discussions in the Alliance cannot be one where communists are attempting to convert capitalists to their school of thought, and neither should it be capitalists attempting to help communists see the `real` picture !
However, none of the above must attempt to in any way diminish the tradition of rich and productive debates within the Alliance. It is only through debate that we can ensure that the pillars of democracy, mandate and accountability can effectively remain. Furthermore, trusting the bona fides of each of us as true adherents to the NDR is especially important. And therefore we must guard against labelling of any sort against those who hold a differing view. It is wrong to presume to think that a comrade is incorrect just because the person is a capitalist, or the person may be a Trotskyite. Rather let us deal with the content and not the label.
There is a growing tendency, to relegate mass civil society struggles to the Courts. In as much as we agree that our democratic Constitution is a fruit of liberation that we all fought for, we should never depend on lawyers to lead the struggle for transformation as opposed to the collective will of the masses. We must guard against the creation of a litigious civil society which regards the Courtroom as the ultimate battlefield. It would result in an elitist form of struggle where only those who can afford to fight in the expensive High Courts of our country to enjoy action.
Let us be clear in our way forward, a committed and united Alliance remains not just relevant but necessary for accelerated transformation, development, and growth!
4. GLOBALISM NOT LIBERALISM !
At a local level, we all understand, that an inherent contradiction will always never stand the test of time. Sandton can never survive if Alexandra remains the same. The US will not be an empire as long as the Roman Empire with Mexico on its doorstep, or in our supposed global village, with the under-developed world. Let me also quickly add, that we are, indeed, in a global village, however, the majority of us are not living close to the river or near the hunting-grounds!
The same must be understood for our continent. There is no way that South Africa can hope to develop itself if this development is not also reflected in Africa. Even the liberals in Western Europe recognised that their relative prosperity, would be threatened, after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, by Eastern Europe, and they devised mechanisms to ensure the development of Eastern Europe, and the entry of the East into the European Union. The development of South Africa must run parallel with the development of all our neighbours in Africa.
Both the African Union and the New Partnership for Africa`s Development, we must at the very first instance, recognise and agree that it is sound and correct to project that Africa`s development as a whole is imperative. So we do not ensure that we continue to create centres of neo-colonial capital like Johannesburg, as Anders Gunder Frank warned us. There will be a whole host of difficulties in how this development will occur, not least because of the number of countries and cultures there are in Africa. However, it would be equally baffling to debunk an entire project of a lifetime on differing project choices. If we are to change the global order in the interest of the Left and the working class, then we have to engage the global order. We cannot expect that we will engage this global (dis)-order, by expecting them to change first! We have to, in a phrase, get them around a negotiating table.
All is not perfect in both the African Union and NEPAD, one believes we all should concede this. However, with correct strategising we can ensure that, the agenda of the left remains on track. Also, let us also note that, the architects of NEPAD, and fortunately one of them is here today, are always reminding us that the difference between NEPAD, and previous development programmes, is that it has political will. This political will they attribute to the fact that NEPAD is championed by the Heads of States. We in SANCO, contend somewhat old-fashionedly, that any Head of State, albeit not democratically elected, like George W Bush, or democratically elected, like Comrade Mbeki, will only have a real political will, if that will is based solely on the will of the people. Therefore, the greatest threat to NEPAD is disunity, that is if a Head of State is elected on an Ánti-Nepad platform. Therefore, it is imperative that all progressive non-State actors are involved in both the production of content and detail of NEPAD, as well as the implementation of NEPAD.
Furthermore, it is one`s opinion that democracy is an objective of socialism, in that it contends that it does not only want political democracy but also economic democracy. Therefore, we must recognise that NEPAD is the most forthright example of a living plan to ensure the democratisation of African governance. It has been endorsed by comrades like Comrade Qadaffi, who if he stood for a democratic election in Libya, he would never lose. Therefore, compliance with NEPAD`s Peer Review Mechanism, will make it very difficult for the West to unfairly ostracise him.
Let me quote Richard Worthington, Project Coordinator for the Sustainable Energy & Climate Change partnership "Whatever one thinks of the NEPAD document in itself, it must be judged not only by what it says, and fails to say, but also how it is used. It is a contested terrain."
5. ONLY WE OWN SA`S WATER, US & GOD !
No aspect of detail in NEPAD can be regarded as sacrosanct, or as the Secretary-General of COSATU, I believe who is an ardent Marxist, likes to say cannot be regarded as the Koran or the Bible. However, there is a single submission that SANCO makes with regard to both NEPAD and our own economic development, which we maintain is sacrosanct - the basic municipal services of our country shall always be in the hands of the people, and therefore be owned by government.
We support the COSATU campaign not to privatise these resources of the people. Lets face it if the provision of electricity or water is to be made on proper corporate profiteering lines, then the poor will not have these life-giving resources. And we do not need to use the examples of failed experiments in Britain, which implemented them under a Thatcher government. Rather, let us look at the most recent example of California in the United States. California privatised their energy industry, which included the electricity industry, however, the state government in California, insisted on a tender that was operated on meagre profit-lines. Therefore, the company that won the tender was not able to meet the demand for energy whilst still making a proper profit. The usual tactic was attempted of ensuring that the State lost the bureaucratic capacity to administer the industry, and therefore, the private company attempted to change the contract so that the prices for electricity would be substantially increased for the individual user. If one recalls correctly, their mistake was that they attempted to do this in an election year. However, being the developed country the United States is, the Californian state government did not lose its capacity, and therefore, the company was forced to renege on its contract, and the state re-nationalised the industry as such.
This example proves decisively, that even in a relatively wealthy country like the US, privatisation did not succeed when it affected basic municipal services. We should not allow our people to suffer because of an economic technique which has proven not just unreliable but an abject failure. Nonetheless, we do maintain that the State must privatise those industries that State involvement has hampered competition that has resulted in unfavourable pricing for the poor, like the entertainment and tourism industry. We do not disagree with privatisation in principle, rather there should be a case by case analysis. However, with regard to the privatisation of basic municipal services, we disagree on principle.
We maintain also that it would be futile to have this discussion on ideological lines, rather, practical logic dictates that we should maintain that our first responsibility is ensuring that all our people have universal service to municipal services, and the responsibility lies solely on our democratic government`s shoulders!
6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Comrades, your Congress has many discussions to have, many debates to conclude, and many questions to be posed. We in SANCO believe that your deliberations will be of the high moral standard and integrity expected of the SACP. The spirit of countless communists live in the struggle to free our country from racist chauvinism. Today you are required to relive that spirit and free our country from capitalist chauvinism. God, help us all, if you do not succeed !
I THANK YOU FOR LISTENING !!!