Monday, July 17, 2017

On Jeremy Cronin's intelligent remarks!

Jeremy Cronin’s shallow and decidedly incorrect view is not a surprise

Article by Floyd Shivambu
17 JUL 2017 01:26 (SOUTH AFRICA)

The so-called communists in the SACP, who were deployed in government, are nothing but careerist cowards and opportunists with no capacity to introduce anything leftward. Instead those like Jeremy Cronin and Secretary-General Blade Nzimande are stumbling blocks to progressive proposals in government.

When presenting the South African Communist Party’s leadership view on its relationship to electoral politics and state power, the recently outgone First Deputy Secretary General remarked that perhaps it is difficult to find intelligent people in the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). Jeremy Cronin’s shallow and decidedly incorrect view is not a surprise because for a very long time now, this liberal airhead masquerading as a communist has thought of himself as the paragon of political virtue, a messiah and intellectual par excellence, only rivalled by Joe Slovo. Intelligent people to him are only those who are sub-controlled by white people, and no African child or collective can ever be considered intelligent.

In his unsubstantiated remark about the lack of intelligence (revolutionary intellectual capacity) of EFF, he fails to ideologically, intellectually and politically pinpoint unwise and unintelligent ideological, political and intellectual mishaps of the EFF both as an organisation or otherwise. He cannot do so because in all forms and shapes of measure, the EFF’s ideological, political and ideological perspectives represent superior logic and that is evidenced by its upward qualitative and quantitative development. As a matter of fact, the EFF is the biggest (qualitatively and quantitatively) socialist political movement on the African continent that is not under the ideological control of white people, now and in the future.
Cronin will not admit to this fact because, despite claiming to be a scientific socialist, Cronin is an undercover white supremacist whose participation in the Communist Party leadership was aimed at sanitising the radical manifestation of Marxism-Leninism in a country that is defined by white political, economic and social domination. Cronin’s role (and perhaps that of his ideological father Joe Slovo) in the National Liberation Movement has always been a sophisticated form of white entryism because uncompromising implementation of the NLM’s original vision would lead to the complete destruction of his kin and kith’s absolute dominance over society and the economy. Entryism refers to the infiltration of a political party by members of another group, with the intention of subverting its policies or objectives , and that is exactly what Jeremy Cronin has been in the liberation movement.

The task of revolutionary leaders in South Africa and all over the world is to constantly provide thorough diagnosis of societal challenges and provide durable solutions. Since Cronin was elected as part of the SACP leadership he has never provided any substantial and clear ideological and political guidance that unsettled white minority control of SA’s wealth and got to benefit the black majority and Africans in particular.

His role has been to correct the grammar, prose and form of emerging revolutionaries who in the process of development will objectively make some theoretical and superficial mistakes in their application of Marxism to the South African problem as it can be expected. Of course, Jeremy would understand English (the language) better than other African leaders in the and society because that’s the only language he knows and it’s his birth language. This is a leader of the so-called vanguard of the working class, who has not bothered to understand the language of the people he is vanguard of, and always ready to belittle them when they make genuine semantic errors in their attempts to explain society through the Marxist-Leninist telescope.

On several occasions, Cronin’s role has been to suppress its understanding of society better. Here are some of the examples: When the decidedly neoliberal Growth, Employment and Redistribution(GEAR) economic policy was adopted, the SACP issued a statement to welcome it, and only somersaulted when Cosatu opposed the macroeconomic strategy. The SACP verbatim said, “T he South African Communist Party welcomes the government’s Growth, Employment and Redistribution Macro-Economic Policy. We fully back the objectives of this macro-economic strategy and note, in particular, the following key features: Contrary to certain attempts to use the macro-economic debate to shift government away from its electoral mandate, the strategy announced today firmly and explicitly situates itself as a framework for the RDP.”

Despite the many justifications and exonerations of GEAR, it represented ideological and global economic dynamics naiveté on the part of the liberation movement, which had been in political power for two years. As a so-called vanguard of the working class, the SACP should have foreseen that neoliberal trade liberalisation, lowering of tariffs, taxation and fiscal reform would destroy industrialisation and the state's capacity to deliver services. The so-called vanguard of the working class should have foreseen that loosening of exchange controls would lead to massive capital flight, outflow of capital necessary for industrialisation to destinations that did not play any meaningful role in its generation.

In the 2000s, Cronin and the SACP forgot that when GEAR was adopted, the SACP fully back(ed) the objectives of this macro-economic strategy. They then conceptualised what they termed the 1996 class project, which was loosely defined as an ideological trend that forced GEAR’s adoption, in pursuit of a neoliberal crisis and therefore responsible for all South Africa’s developmental and economic problems. The defeat of the 1996 class project was then mixed with the removal of Thabo Mbeki as the Godfather of the class project. The ANC’s 52 National Conference was the theatre upon which the class project would be defeated and succeeded by a progressive reconfigured alliance. This, the intelligent Cronin argued, would lead to a permanent solution to our problems.

Hindsight reveals the simple fact that the SACP and its lead ideologue, Jeremy Cronin, the intellectual, misdiagnosed the South African problem, and history proves that the so-called 1996 class project does not have any scientific basis. The 1996 class project, conceptualised by Cronin, was nothing but a factional hogwash of the Communist Party’s (an organised faction in the ANC) bid for its leaders, not its ideas, to be accommodated and mainstreamed in the ANC as ministers and deputy ministers. This is evidenced by so many statements made by SACP leaders that they are tired of hunting for nogwaja (rabbits) alongside the ANC, and the ANC leaders eat alone.

The deepening crisis of the ANC-led liberation movement which will lead to its total destruction and ruin of all its component parts reveal that the SACP’s unscientific characterisation of the South African post-1994 problem as a problem of the 1996 class project was not only scientifically lousy, but was totally wrong. The socio-economic crises facing South Africa today reveals the fact that the so-called communists in the SACP, who were deployed in government, are nothing but careerist cowards and opportunists with no capacity to introduce anything leftward. Instead those like Cronin and Secretary-General Blade Nzimande are stumbling blocks to progressive proposals in government. Government under Jacob Zuma is directionless, the most corrupt, confused and self-contradictory, but the communists are there. Where is the intelligence of the Cronin and the SACP collective to rescue the situation?
When there were problems in Cosatu, Jeremy Cronin was part of a factionalist perspective that justified why Numsa and subsequently Zwelinzima Vavi should be expelled from Cosatu. It is not a secret that the SACP played a central role in fomenting the divisions that led to the split of the trade union movement. What is intelligent with a Communist Party that splits a workers’ movement and constantly banishes progressive forces into many components that do not speak in one voice? Isn’t the role of the vanguard party to unite all working-class forces?
Perhaps one of the most misleading things about the Communist Party was Jeremy’s concoction of pure lies about the leadership of the ANCYL, the Economic Freedom Fighters’ generation of the Congress Movement, which advocated for land expropriation without compensation and nationalisation of mines. There is no doubt that one of the greatest opportunities to radicalise the ANC-led liberation movement into a decisive, principled and ideologically steadfast Left movement was during Commander-in-Chief Julius Malema’s leadership of the ANC Youth League. Instead of rallying all progressive forces behind the radical calls for socialist economic freedom in our lifetime, the SACP through Jeremy Cronin’s lies and conspiracy was at the centre of driving a wedge between progressive workers and youth movements.

Sophisticated and intelligent revolutionaries always know when to maximise on revolutionary unity for a common socialist cause. The nature of Leninist movements in the world is their ability to gather immediate interests of different groups in society and consolidate them into a strategic vision and path towards socialism. Instead of playing this role, the SACP has always been at the centre of fomenting divisions in the liberation movement and casting aspersions on the true nature and character of socialist demands. The SACP and subsequently Cosatu was misled (lied to) by Jeremy Cronin that the then leadership of the ANCYL wanted to rescue some BEE deals in the correct and genuine call for nationalisation of mines. This has been proven to be conspiratorial hogwash promoted to protect Cronin’s kin and kith because black people’s ownership of mines in SA is less than 5%.
Parliament recently underwent a process of drafting an Expropriation Bill, and Jeremy suspended all his ministerial responsibilities and went to camp in the portfolio committee on public works every day to prevent an insertion of a clause that would have secured expropriation without compensation. Ministers and deputy ministers’ (executive) draft legislations and submit them to Parliament (legislative body) to deliberate and conduct public hearings. After this process, Parliament adopts the bill and sends to a president of accession, and the bill becomes law, an Act of Parliament.

During the process of deliberating and conducting public hearings on the Expropriation Bill, Jeremy Cronin, the intelligent Deputy Minister of Public Works, was camping in the committee to specifically prevent expropriation of land without compensation, something which he successfully managed to achieve. It is not surprising because in the course of pretending to be revolutionaries, the majority of white political activists in the Congress movement and other formations are inclined towards defending the true interests of kin and kith at the expense of principle.

In all the parliamentary debates led by the EFF and recently the NFP, Jeremy self-appointed himself as the defender of the status quo. He always comes to debate that the constitutional and therefore land status quo should remain because anything else will disrupt and disturb his kin and kith. This is the intelligent communist who struggles to find intelligent people in the EFF, and the reason they are not intelligent is because EFF leaders and members are demanding the land without compensation. To white supremacists, the legitimate demand for land to be returned to its rightful owners is of course unintelligent.
Jeremy Cronin’s other role in the SA Communist Party has also been to suppress internal organisational democracy. In the SACP 12th congress in Port Elizabeth, Jeremy is the one who changed the majority of congress’ view on state power and drafted something called a reconfigured alliance. We are aware of this because we were part of the resolutions committee and know that the majority of SACP members wanted SACP to contest political power independently from the ANC. SACP members might be wrong or right in their demand that their party should contest elections, but their intellectual contributions always get undermined by Jeremy Cronin, who has no regard for organisational democracy, in particular the view that the views of the majority must dominate over the minority views.
He seems to have done the same thing in the 14th Congress, because the reports point to the reality that if the question of the SACP’s relationship to state power was voted on, the majority would have voted that the party should contest independently. Like they did in the SACP’s 12 National Congress, the leadership duped their membership by cutting and pasting resolutions on the party’s relationship to state power.
In 2007, the SACP’s resolution on its relationship to state power and electoral politics read as follows:

“That the SACP contests state power in elections in the context of a reconfigured Alliance.To mandate the incoming CC to actively pursue the different potential modalities of future SACP electoral campaigning. These modalities could involve either:

“An electoral pact with our Alliance partners, which could include agreement on deployments, possible quotas, the accountability of elected representatives including accountability of SACP cadres to the Party, the election manifesto, and the importance of an independent face and role for the SACP and its cadres within legislatures. OR,
“Independent electoral lists on the voter´s roll with the possible objective of constituting a coalition Alliance agreement post elections.”
In 2017, in their 14 National Congress, the SACP resolution on state power and its relationship to electoral politics reads as follows:

“The SACP must actively contest elections. That the modality through which we contest elections may, or may not be within, the umbrella of a reconfigured alliance.”
The declaration of the 14 Congress says,
“The SACP  remains committed to strengthening and consolidating our ANC alliance. This will require a significant reconfiguration. Whether the ANC has the capacity to lead its own process of renewal, and whether it will be able to once more play the critical role of uniting itself and its alliance remains uncertain.”

Many newspaper and television headlines ran front-page and leading stories announcing that the SACP will contest elections in 2019 independently, and such represents a dismal failure to understand the SACP and particularly Jeremy Cronin’s ideological misguidance.

As a matter of fact, the SACP is not planning to contest any elections because of principle issues, but instead is waiting for the outcomes of the ANC elective conference in December 2017. When the leadership outcomes favour the careerist and factional interests of the Communist Party leaders, they will re-assert their loyalty to the ANC, and when the outcomes are not favourable, they will try to cobble up some broad front to contest elections. If the latter is the case, the SACP will encounter its rude awakening that boardroom politics are not the same as groundwork. They will evidently not achieve even a fraction of what the EFF achieved in less than 12 months.
The SACP resolutions are drafted, justified and presented by Jeremy Cronin because, like a large number of the so-called communists, he lacks principled Marxist-Leninist discipline of not sacrificing principle on the altar of political convenience. The fact of the matter is that Jeremy Cronin is a liberal airhead masquerading as an African communist. He does not have the lived experience of blackness and does not understand the pain of landlessness and hopelessness that black people have suffered and continue to suffer 23 years after democracy. He has misled on many occasions. Under his leadership, the SACP has been used as an instrument of causing disunity among progressive working-class forces in and outside the Congress movement.

As a deputy minister of public works, Jeremy Cronin never came up with any innovative solution to the reality that the state is largely a tenant of white property owners in the capital cities for administrative headquarters, functional and service offices and even police stations. When Jeremy was appointed deputy minister of public works, he found the state renting offices and he will leave it like that. There has never been an intelligent solution he provided as a deputy minister of public works. Government is occupying rented property all over South Africa, and the Department of Public Works he leads and led with a fellow communist does not have a plan out of such. The Department of Public Works is instead renowned for justifying the patently illegal construction of the Nkandla private residence of Jacob Zuma. The Department of Public Works is also known for the creation of lousy underpaying jobs called expanded public works, which converts youth into cheap and easily disposable labourers for rapacious and callous contractors who loot state resources.

Blade Nzimande, who is overstaying his welcome as the General Secretary of the Communist Party, is Minister of Higher Education and Training, and yet the Communist Party has never provided any substantial and intelligent solution to the need for fee-free quality education. This is despite the fact that the ANC’s 52 National conference resolved to introduce free education for the poor until undergraduate level. Amid the #FeesMustFall struggles, the SACP of Blade Nzimande and Jeremy Cronin chose to concoct conspiracies around the activists, and never proposed any intelligent solutions. The Communist Party deployees have illustrated beyond any doubt that they will never do anything different from the neoliberal ANC even when they are given political power.

The EFF’s leadership collective has on the contrary produced creative and innovative and groundbreaking exact diagnosis of the SA problem, and constantly provides durable solutions. All the 15 diagnoses and analyses contained in the EFF Founding Manifesto are an exact reading of South Africa’s political and economic landscape. The EFF’s policy proposals are trendsetting, and always influence a discourse previously ignored or suppressed by the capitalist establishment. The EFF’s submissions on how multinational capital steals wealth through tax avoidance and illicit flows has led to SARS establishing and strengthening the internal units that deal with transfer pricing and aggressive tax avoidance.
The EFF's submissions on land has placed the land question on the agenda, even of the confused ANC. The EFF’s qualitative analyses and interventions have translated into quantity, leading mass protest actions and securing votes. The Communist Party has never organised or led a mass protest action that is even 10% of the protest action organised and led by the EFF. The Communist Party lacks relevance in society, and yet there is no sane political analysis and understanding of South Africa that can exclude the EFF.

The EFF is also able to build a dynamic relationship between the mass struggles and effective parliamentary work. We have made substantial and impactful transformative submissions on the transformation of the financial sector, and despite having taken up a campaign in 2002, the SACP has not made any substantive and impactful submission anywhere, let alone in Parliament.

The EFF has achieved in four years what the Communist Party could not achieve as an organised faction in the ANC. The SACP under the intelligent leadership of Jeremy Cronin does not have comprehensive policies on many key areas of society. The EFF has. Policy in SACP is the feelings of its leaders, and not scientific diagnosis of societal problems and solutions, hence the entire recent conference discussed only state capture that was introduced by the EFF. But well, Jeremy Cronin will never acknowledge the success of the EFF nor its potential because its policies will overturn his kin and kith’s economic dominance.

The EFF will never be diverted by liberals masquerading as communists because in 2013 we adopted a Founding Manifesto that inter alia diagnosed that, “ the Congress-aligned left-wing formations have been swallowed into reform politics of patronage and will never regain integrity to pursue real working-class struggles any time soon. The organised Left has been swallowed by the state, and is currently at the forefront of justifying the rapacious and callous theft of public funds by the incumbent president of the republic”. That is what the SACP has become under the intelligent leadership of Jeremy Cronin. Let us see what will be of a Cronin-less Communist Party, will they unite working class forces, and stop the blind loyalty to the corruption-ridden and captured ANC?

All of South African society knows and now understands that the true voice of the working class and the poor, the vanguard movement for socialist economic emancipation, is the EFF, and not Cronin’s SACP. The SACP’s relationship to state power and electoral politics is dependent on whether its preferred faction in the ANC wins elections. The SACP fails to internalise the most basic Leninist observation that, “ Whatever guise a republic may assume, however democratic it may be, if it is a bourgeois republic, if it retains private ownership of the land and factories, and if private capital keeps the whole of society in wage-slavery, that is, if the republic does not carry out what is proclaimed in the Programme of our Party and in the Soviet Constitution, then this state is a machine for the suppression of some people by others.”

The only movement that understands this in South Africa is the EFF through lived experience and once again, there are no white messiahs who will define the contours of our revolutionary struggles.

Floyd Shivambu is EFF Deputy President

Wednesday, July 05, 2017

FACT: Both Factions of the ANC are not opposed to wwhite Monopoly capitalism.


Floyd Shivambu,

The ongoing discussion of white monopoly capital was a proxy war for factions in the lead-up to the 54thNational Conference of the ANC in December 2017. Those associated with the Gupta-led faction of the ANC opportunistically proclaim white monopoly capital as the enemy of their clumsily conceptualised Radical Economic Transformation. Those associated with Cyril Ramaphosa deny the existence of white monopoly capital as the enemy in the official lexicon of the ANC-led National Liberation Movement. The latter group attribute the term of white monopoly capital to the failed Bell Pottinger propaganda campaign to salvage the correctly damaged public image of the Gupta-controlled and -centred criminal syndicate. Instead, the group argue strongly that “inclusive growth” is central to Radical Economic Transformation instead of misguided focus on white monopoly capital. 
When summarising the core of what the majority of commissions resolved, Joel Netshitenzhe said that the majority of commissions resolved that white monopoly capital is not the enemy, rather monopoly capital in all its expressions should be contested and complemented on the balance of probabilities. Whether this is the true reflection of the National Policy Conference, the reality is that both factions are not opposed to white monopoly capitalism.
The reflections in this perspective will cogently illustrate that both factions are not opposed to white monopoly capitalism. They are using the debate as a jostle for factional ideological dominance, which is not ahistorical, yet certainly defined by mediocrity of both memory and thought. We present here a cogent illustration that, like the previous discussions on the developmental state, second phase of transition, white monopoly capital, the current discussion is tantamount to the Shakespearean characterisation of life. The debate on white monopoly capital, like the majority of the policy discussions therein are...
... a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. (Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 5)
Capitalism and fractions of capital
The unending nature of the debate on who constitutes their strategic enemy or friend is due to the ANC’s lack of understanding of the simple fact that capitalism manifests itself through different and sometimes rival fractions. This debate of fractions of capitalism or manifestation of capitalism has been going on in South Africa for a long time, and the only time the ANC mentioned it in its official documents post 1994 was at the 2007 Policy Conference. The official recommendations of the ANC Policy Conference, among other things, said, “the balance between unity and struggle would be dictated by the needs of the moment; and it would be influenced by the practical conduct of the various fractions of monopoly capital” (ANC, 2007).
What this means is that in one country or one capitalist system or any given moment, you can have the co-existence of a comprador capitalist fraction, parasitic capitalist fraction, foreign capitalist fraction, monopoly capitalist fraction, neo-colonial capitalist fraction. As Morris argued about fractions of capital in the South African apartheid state in 1975, “the fraction that is economically dominant may very well not be politically dominant. In the case of South Africa this is very clear from Kaplan’s work on the earlier period of capitalist development, where he essentially argued that while gold mining was economically dominant it was the national bourgeoisie that was politically dominant” (Morris, 1975). This is an acknowledgement that in various political developments, there exist fractions of capital, which are dominant and influence the content and character of the political sphere.
In the book, Class struggles and the Periodisation of the South African state, Davies et al argued that; 
Within capitalist social formations, classes are not reproduced as a unity, but are fractured and divided. Several dominant classes co-exist (dependent on the articulation with other modes) and, more critically, the dominant capitalist class is itself divided into several fractions (resting on their differing roles in the expanded reproduction of capital). The dominant classes and fractions share a common interest in the maintenance of the relations of exploitation in general, but simultaneously have contradictory interests corresponding to their particular place in the relations of exploitation.” (Davies et al, 1978: 5).
When we gave the closing address to the EFF Students’ Command, we highlighted this phenomenon, and said that, “as the 21st century generation of anti-capitalists, we should not be trapped into a trend of neoliberal anti-racists, whose antithesis to racialised capitalism is black capitalism, or even worse family patronage capitalism that thrives through bribery and attempts to manipulate socio-political discourse. The enemy of the revolution is capitalism in its racialised form and all the other fractions of capitalism such as the parasitic and comprador bourgeoisie. We should not fight for a whiteless society because such is out rightly reactionary, but we should fervently fight for a classless society”. (Closing Address to the EFFSC 2ndNational Students’ Assembly, 2017).
Political Factions and Fractions of Capital
Factional wars are always defined by half-truths because they are about individuals who seek to lead the organisation often for individual, and not collective, benefit. They then concoct narratives that suit their candidates and leadership preferences. Factions hide truths and ignore facts and only repeat what suits their agenda, even when such does not make ideological and political sense. 
The Gupta-led faction of the ANC, the supporters of Dlamini-Zuma, use the concept of white monopoly capital as a justification for their looting activities, which is thus far defined by callous siphoning off billions of rand from State-Owned Companies. When caught stealing, this faction cries foul by driving a narrative that they are not stealing alone, they are stealing alongside a fraction of capital called white monopoly capital or their ill-gotten and corruption proceeds are not as significant as that of white monopoly capital. 
Closer attention to the Gupta-led faction reveals the fact that the looting group is opposed to white monopoly capitalists, and not opposed to monopoly capitalism. Their opposition to white monopoly capitalists is premised on the view that instead of the white capitalist looters, they or their close friends should be the looters. If they were opposed to white monopoly capitalism, they would provide cogent alternatives, which could be full implementation of anti-capitalist policies, or the Freedom Charter, which is the only policy perspective mentioned in the ANC constitution, and one which members are enjoined to defend and protect.
To understand this properly, perhaps an example of gangsters should be employed. The Gupta gangsters’ opposition to white monopoly capitalism is like drug dealers who are opposed to other rival drug dealers, while not opposed to drug dealing. Nowhere in their narratives do the Gupta groups propose substantial anti-white monopoly capitalism. Whenever their thieving is exposed, the parasitic capitalists choose to point to the fact that other capitalists are stealing too. Even their propaganda news channel’s attempts to depict other capitalists and call for radical economic transformation is poorly articulated and lack any sophistication. 
Like gangsters, the parasitic capitalists drive a narrative that anyone who is opposed to their form of capitalist theft is on the side of white monopoly capitalists. That is how all gangsters all over the world operate. They are quick to group those who are opposed to their illegal activities with the gangster rivals. The jostling in and around this phenomenon therefore added to the confusion of the ANC’s Policy Conference. 
Not all forces are opposed to capitalism; they are opposed to different and rival fractions of capital. Those who associate with and are in the control of the parasitic capitalists view the defeat of the notion of white monopoly capitalist fraction as a factional victory. Those who are associated with the white monopoly capitalist fraction believe isolating and banishing only the parasitic capitalists will be a panacea for their internal organisational and political crises.
Not an enemy of the revolution! The ANC’s historical posture on white monopoly capital
There is certainly substantial historical account on how sections and individuals in the liberation movement thought of white monopoly capital as the enemy of the National Democratic Revolution. Different perspectives and opinion pieces of leaders of the ANC highlighted the existence of the white monopoly capitalist fraction, which holds monopolistic power over the economy. However, the official documents of the ANC, including the Morogoro Strategy & Tactics (1st Policy Conference in 1969), Kabwe Conference resolutions (2ndPolicy Conference in 1985), and the Gallagher Convention Centre resolutions (3rd Policy Conference in 2007) did not characterise white monopoly capital as enemy of the National Democratic Revolution. 
Emphatically, the ANC’s 3rd Policy Conference resolution on the position of white monopoly capital is that “to characterise monopoly capital as an enemy of the NDR would be too simplistic”. To avoid the historicism that has been bandied by the Gupta quasi-Left ideologues, who embrace neo-liberalism, speak Left and walk Right, it is important to quote the omitted ANC’s latest resolution on white monopoly capital. The ANC’s 2007 3rd Policy Conference resolved elaborately on white monopoly capital as follows; 
There was agreement in all Commissions that there were fundamental areas of divergence between the objectives and value systems of the ANC and those of monopoly capital. In particular, there are many things in the behaviour of private monopolies that have the effect of constraining higher rates of growth and skewing social development. These include monopoly pricing and other forms of rent-seeking, placing barriers to entry in some industries and a value system based on greed and crass materialism.
However to characterise monopoly capital as an enemy of the NDR would be too simplistic. Rather our approach, as elaborated in the draft S&T document, should be to build a strong developmental state, with the strategic capacity and the instruments to deal with these negative tendencies, while at the same time mobilising private capital in general to partner the state in increasing rates of investment and job-creation. Further, the centrality of finance capital in the structure of the South African economy, and its capacity to hinder economic development should be underlined.
Virtually all the Commissions agreed with the approach of ‘unity and struggle’ – carrot and stick – in relation to all private capital, proceeding from the understanding, as one commission put it, that ‘unity and struggle’ existed among opposites that may have to co-exist. The balance between unity and struggle would be dictated by the needs of the moment; and it would be influenced by the practical conduct of the various fractions of monopoly capital. The draft will need to be sharpened taking into account many other detailed comments from the Commissions on this issue”.
Those who partook in this Conference will remember that all commissions that were convened to discuss various organisational, political and economic issues were mandated to first respond to the question of whether white monopoly capital is enemy of the NDR. This 3rdANC Policy Conference was an important platform in the life of the liberation movement because it was the first policy conference post 1994, and was preceded by the Morogoro Conference in 1969 and Kabwe in 1985. So a policy conference with a status of Kabwe and Morogoro unanimously states, “all the Commissions agreed with the approach of ‘unity and struggle’ – carrot and stick – in relation to all private capital, proceeding from the understanding, as one Commission put it, that ‘unity and struggle’ existed among opposites that may have to co-exist”. 
What this means is that, in the ANC, white monopoly capital is not the enemy of the revolution, it is instead a convenient opponent who should not be made an enemy in pursuit of a social democratic developmental state. Worse still, white monopoly capitalism and capitalism in its entirety are not the enemy of the ANC-led national liberation struggle. The overall principle and concrete standing resolution of the ANC is that “to characterise monopoly capital as an enemy of the NDR would be too simplistic” (ANC, 2007).
White monopoly capitalism has historically been understood as constituting three mutually reinforcing phenomena: 
  1. White people’s dominance in terms of ownership of the means of production (capital). The ANC is not opposed to white people’s ownership of the economy and this is evidenced by its refusal to discontinue private ownership of the land and other strategic sectors of the economy. 
  2. White monopoly capitalism can be understood as real monopolistic ownership, wherein they own and control corporations that are sole role players in an economic sector, and therefore preventing others from participating. The remedy to this can be competition laws enforcement.
  3. Third, it can be understood as white people ownership and control of the capitalist system. The ANC is not against capitalism in all its expressions and manifestations. 
Opposition to white monopoly capitalism means that any political movement that defines itself as the enemy of such should set goals to destroy capitalism. Destroying capitalism means discontinuation of private ownership of capital, the means of production and that is not in the agenda of the ANC. While there are attempts to deconstruct corporate monopolies, there is no clear ideological compass on how such should be achieved. What the ANC fails to comprehend is that creation of a social democratic developmental state will not happen without destruction of the capitalist property relations that were shaped by colonial-cum-apartheid and harnessed by the post-1994 ideological confusion and economic leadership incapacity.
An ideological amoeba: Why the ANC cannot be radical
The unending problem of the ANC and possibly all liberation movements is that they somehow believe that they can adapt capitalism to achieve their economic liberation goals. That is not the case and has never been the case anywhere in the world. When analysing the National Question, Lenin detected this reality far much earlier, and said, a certain understanding has emerged between the bourgeoisie of the exploiting countries and that of the colonies, so that very often, even perhaps in most cases, the bourgeoisie of the oppressed countries, although they also support national movements, nevertheless act against all revolutionary movements and revolutionary classes with a certain degree of understanding and agreement with the imperialist bourgeoisie, that is to say together with it” (Lenin, 1921).
The draft strategy and tactics admits to the sell-out position adopted by the ANC in the transition period from apartheid to an inclusive political system. It says, “During the negotiations process, compromises were struck around modalities of the transition. The liberation movement agreed to ‘sunset clauses’ operational in the first few years of the democratic dispensation. This pertained to a government of national unity and the easing of apartheid apparatchiks out of the state system. There would be no arbitrary appropriation of the wealth illegitimately and illegally accumulated by the white community over the centuries. At the same time, the white community was expected to contribute to the reparations that the process of reconciliation demanded. (ANC, 2017). 
Of course, this strategic retreat during negotiation was informed by the objective military incapacity to defeat the apartheid establishment and most importantly, the ANC’s ideological indeterminateness. Historical and current evidence illustrates the point that there is completely nothing the ANC cannot subject to compromise. This includes its principles, values, constitution and policies. This therefore turns the ANC into an ideological amoeba, with no capacity whatsoever to provide sound and decisive economic leadership to South Africa and the African continent. 
For a sustained period now, the ANC’s consistent approach to capital has been underpinned by its non-antagonistic approach, and at best as an ally in the construction of the loosely conceptualised National Democratic Society. The contestation now is which fraction of capital does the ANC associate with, and the political factional battles reflect that. Both are opposed to either the white monopoly capitalist fraction or the parasitic capitalist fraction, not because they oppose capitalism, but because they want to be substitutes of the same phenomenon in order to continue with the exploitation of labour and natural resources. 
While attempts are made on both sides to achieve a degree of ideological coherence in the justification of factional narratives, both factions are not anti-capitalism, meaning that neither is against white monopoly capitalism and neither is against parasitic capitalism. They both seek to be appendages of the capitalist system that defines South Africa. They somehow believe that they will create a social democratic developmental state without a clear ideological posture towards capitalism in South Africa.
Now, the ANC Policy Conference will for factional purposes characterise white monopoly capital as enemy or complement of the NDR, but might take a resolution of expropriation of land without compensation. Like all previous policy conference resolutions, these will mean nothing, as they will not be turned into coherent policy positions of the ANC in government. The ANC is accustomed to taking radical sounding resolutions, and yet lacks the courage to implement them. 
I present here a quick survey of what the ANC previously resolved and failed to implement;
a) The 2006 signed agreement to switchover to digital terrestrial television (DTT) broadcasting on 17 June 2015.
b) The 2007 Policy Conference resolved to establish a State-owned pharmaceutical company.
c) The 2011 NGC resolved that “there was greater consensus on nationalisation of mines and other strategic sectors of the economy”
d) The 2012 conference resolved to introduce fee free quality higher education.
e) The 2012 conference resolved and reaffirmed on the implementation of the national health insurance (NHI) system by further strengthening the public healthcare system and ensuring adequate provision of funding.
f) The 2013 conference resolved to expropriate without compensation on land acquired through unlawful means.
There are so many resolutions which the ANC has taken in previous conferences and these do not find expression in practical governance of the state and the economy. The reason why the ANC is incapable of implementing its own resolutions was long provided by Frantz Fanon. In his seminal characterisation of the post-colonial state, Fanon makes the following observations,
The national bourgeoisie, which takes over power at the end of the colonial regime, is an underdeveloped bourgeoisie. Its economic clout is practically zero, and in any case, no way commensurate with that of its metropolitan counterpart which it intends replacing. 
This national bourgeoisie possesses neither industrialists nor financiers. 
The national bourgeoisie in the underdeveloped countries is not geared to production, invention, creation, or work. All its energy is channelled into intermediary activities. Networking and scheming seem to be its underlying vocation. The national bourgeoisie has the psychology of a businessman, not that of a captain of industry. And it should go without saying that the rapacity of the colonists and the embargo system installed by colonialism hardly left it any choice. (Fanon, Frantz 1961)
The ANC’s failure to attain a clear ideological compass is a major contributor to its ideological lack of direction. Factions recurrently shift destinations and articulate inconsistent and at times contradictory missions. As a liberation movement, it was easier to determine the direction which was the ending of racist rule and replacing it with an inclusive political system. However, in post-colonial-cum-apartheid rule, it is almost impossible to clearly define the direction because their various irreconcilable inter-class and intra-class interests.
For a political movement, lack of an ideological compass means that the frustrations would literally confront a group of people who have crossed a river and have to determine the destination after crossing the river. The most difficult part is as a group, who do you define as enemies in the next journey, because during the river-crossing, there was relative consensus that crocodiles (white racist minority political control) are the common enemy, and now there is no clarity as to whether all animals across the river are the enemy.
The only organisation that has a clear perspective on and against capitalism in South Africa is the Economic Freedom Fighters, because it carries a clear intention and mission to discontinue private ownership of the means of production and institute a democratic socialist ownership and control of the commanding heights of the economy. The EFF is the only economic emancipation movement in South Africa that stands against all fractions and manifestations of capitalism, whether it be white monopoly capitalist fraction, foreign capitalist fraction or parasitic capitalist fraction. DM