Malaika wa Azania wrote: We have been told many untruths about the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). These lies have permeated the atmosphere of our society like a coiling miasma But lies must be exposed, not only because lying is a counter-revolutionary vice, but because the masses of our people deserve to be respected enough to be engaged in objective conversations that allow them to make informed decisions. Politics by their very nature are nothing but a struggle for power and understandably, this power is sought at all costs, even at the cost of objective truth or honest analysis. But this narrative must not go unchallenged, because to allow it to persist is to give up on the possibility of a political milieu that is characterised by robust debates, critical analysis and principled politics. Therefore, the lies that we have been told about the EFF must be exposed and challenged. LIE #1: THE EFF IS A CONVERGENCE POINT OF PEOPLE WHO HATE PRESIDENT ZUMA There is a popular assertion that seeks to suggest that the EFF is nothing but an organisation of disgruntled people who have a score to settle with the current leadership of the ANC. This assertion is not entirely accurate. It is true that the founding members of the EFF, comrades Julius Malema and Floyd Shivambu, have a bitter grudge against President Jacob Zuma for what transpired at the 2012 ANC National Disciplinary Committee hearing. The two were found guilty of bringing the organisation into disrepute by making pronouncements about the government of Botswana that were viewed as divisive. The hearing concluded with the suspension of Floyd Shivambu and the expulsion of Julius Malema, who at the time was the President of the ANC Youth League. These two individuals certainly harbour bitterness towards the ANC leadership, to want to deny this would be a tragic untruth. However, the EFF is an organisation with over 500 000 registered members throughout the country. Some of these members are former members of the ANC who, disappointed by what they believe to be an unscrupulous leadership, decided to locate themselves within an alternative political home. But there are thousands of EFF members who are not former members of the ANC, individuals who joined the EFF solely on the basis that they identify with its revolutionary objectives. These individuals – a multitude of ordinary people – are citizens of our country who have lost faith in the capacity of the ANC to redefine a posture for itself, one that is devoid of characteristics of neo-liberalism, an ANC that is on the extreme opposite of right wing tendencies. An example I want to use to illustrate my point, only because it is one I know too well, is that of myself. When I made the decision to become a part of the EFF in June 2013, I didn’t do this because I had scores to settle with anyone, nor because I was bitter about anything. Having never been an ANC member, I had no reason to join an organisation on the basis that I wanted to settle scores with the ANC leadership. The ANC leadership has never done anything wrong to me. I joined the EFF because I believe in its ideological posture and what I believe are progressive strategic objectives. I ultimately left the EFF, but it was not because I stopped believing in the cause of economic freedom. It is within my own experiences and motivations that I argue against the popular view that seeks to suggest that all members of the EFF are nothing else but haters of the president of our republic. There are many people who are in the EFF for genuine reasons that have nothing to do with the ANC leadership. As a matter of fact, there are people who are in the EFF despite their resentment of both Julius Malema and Floyd Shivambu, people who have no regard for these two individuals but who, out of conviction, support the call for economic freedom that they do not believe the ANC will ever heed. LIE # 2: THE EFF CANNOT CLAIM LEGITIMACY BECAUSE IT HAS NO STRUGGLE CREDENTIALS This tragic argument is not only a lie, it is also a painful expression of intellectual laziness. To understand why this argument is lazy, we must briefly revisit the history of our country. The formation of the ANC in 1912 was not an accident of history. It was an evolution of struggles from the wars of resistance against colonialism and imperial devastation. Falsified history books would have us believe that the breaking point in our country was the tribal war between natives, known as Mfecane/Difecane. The truth, however, is that the foundation for the wars of resistance in South Africa was laid with the advent of the arrival of Dutch settlers in the Cape Colony in 1652, followed a century later by the arrival of British settlers. From the moment these settlers descended on our shores, this country has not known peace. In 1884, an important event happened in Germany. Heads of European superpowers organised what would be known as the Berlin Conference. It was at this conference that Europeans who, at that moment, arrogated themselves the power to claim territories in our minerals rich continent sealed Africa’s fate. Like one would cut slices of cake, Africa was sliced up into different territories that would be in the control of European superpowers. France and Britain took most of the western and central region of the continent. Germany appropriated Cameroon and Namibia for herself. Portugal appropriated Angola, Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde and other territories. King Leopold of Belgium took Zaire – what is now known as the Democratic Republic of Congo. Most of the southern region was appropriated by the British Empire. Simply put, African natives were dispossessed of land and economy. For centuries after this, African people waged a struggle against colonialism, a struggle that had two primary objectives: the unification of the continent that had been divided by tribal wars and fundamentally, the repossession of land from the clutches of a settler minority. In South Afrika, this resistance struggle, which had already started long before 1884, took the form of outright violent conflict, culminating in historical battles such as the Battle of Blood River (1838), Battle of Isandlwana (1879), the Bambatha Rebellion (1906) to name just few. These wars became the manure that fed an inevitable resistance and national liberation movement and in 1912, the ANC was born. For many years, the ANC, like many other liberation movements on the continent, waged a struggle against colonialism and all its manifestations, one of which was apartheid. There is a false narrative that seeks to suggest that ours was a struggle against apartheid. This is false because apartheid was a policy of segregation on the grounds of race and ours was not a struggle merely against legislation born of this, but a struggle against colonialism in its totality. Therefore, the ANC was not established to defeat apartheid, but to defeat and reverse the destruction of land dispossession and the disenfranchisement of natives. What transpired in 1994, contrary to popular belief, was not a revolution. It was a political transition that outlawed apartheid and paved a path for a democratic dispensation characterised by a political system of majority rule, of a popular government for and by the people of South Africa. The ANC, like other national liberation movements such as the PAC and AZAPO, played an instrumental role in this particular struggle. So it is true that the ANC has credentials with regards to its role in the struggle for outlawing apartheid. But the EFF, like the ANC, is a product of material conditions that shape and determine the orientation of struggle. It is therefore a lazy argument to say that the EFF has no apartheid struggle credentials because of course, the EFF is not a product of conditions of apartheid, but a product of conditions of post-apartheid South Africa, a South Africa that is not yet liberated and one that is still waging a struggle against colonialism. Therefore the EFF has an opportunity, a space and reason to contest the prevailing terrain with the intention of claiming struggle credentials, because for as long as the land question – our fundamental historic struggle – remains unsolved, the grounds remain fertile for the struggle to continue and therefore, for the EFF to alter or influence the course of history. LIE # 3: THE EFF IS ANOTHER COPE It is very convenient for those in power to seek to demobilise society by claiming to be the only viable solution. To do this, examples of historical alternatives will be highlighted and used as a barometer by which the present circumstances ought to be measured. This is vividly illustrated in how the EFF is dismissed as “another COPE”, without this simplistic assertion being qualified. But of course, this assertion cannot be qualified because there is little truth to it. There are three common factors between COPE and EFF. Firstly, like COPE, the EFF is a post-1994 political formation. Secondly, like COPE, former members of the ANC established the EFF. And thirdly, both the EFF and COPE were formed under the current administration, an administration that is a product of the Polokwane Conference. That is where the similarities between the EFF and COPE end. The differences not only set the organisations apart, they also define their very postures. Where COPE was established as a “rescued” ANC, the EFF is established as an alternative to the ANC. The formation of COPE was born from the argument that the Polokwane Conference where former President Thabo Mbeki was ousted, entrenched the worst elements of the Mass Democratic Movement: philistinism, corruption, immorality and simply put, a leadership incapable of passing through the eye of the needle. The EFF on the other hand, is established not to present a cleaner ANC, but to present an alternative space altogether, characterised by alternative policies, politics and discourse. Another important factor about the EFF which is never mentioned and which is crucial, is that the EFF was born at a time when the African continent is experiencing a new wave similar to the one that hit in the 1950s/1960s. The latter was a wave of colonial resistance which saw many countries entering into a period of armed resistance: the Mau Mau uprisings in Kenya, the Second Chimurenga in Zimbabwe, the Ath-Thawra Al-Jazā’iriyya in Algeria and many others. The current wave is a wave of youth-led popular uprisings that began with (untold) protests in the Sahrawi Republic (Western Sahara) and spread into the Arab North (Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and Libya), in what is referred to as the Arab Spring. For the first time since the 1950s/1960s wave, the youth of Africa is at the forefront of popular uprisings against their governments. It is in this important period that the EFF was born, and therefore we must begin to analyse what the relationship is between the birth of a youth-led movement of economic freedom fighters and a continent engulfed in flames ignited by the youth protesting for economic freedom and an end to government corruption and autocracy. To want to argue that the EFF is another COPE is to fail to appreciate that the EFF is not merely a product of angry Zuma-hating youths, but a movement born in an Africa whose youth makes up over 50% of the population, an Africa where structural inequalities are growing exponentially, an Africa where the fundamental land question remains a thorny issue and most importantly, an Africa where a wave of youth resistance movements is sweeping through all regions, inspired by the Arab Spring uprisings. And therefore, the EFF is not like COPE, ideologically or otherwise. I conclude with the poignant words of one of my favourite rap artists, Immortal Technique, who in his masterpiece Point of No Return correctly asserts: “Universal truth is not measured in mass appeal.” It may be popular to perpetuate these three lies about the EFF, but just because it is popular does not make the lies any less untrue. And indeed, we shall ALWAYS speak the truth even if our voices shake!
Posted on: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:13:01 +0000