Jacob Zuma- Leftist?

[Small Geezer]

Around the time of the South African elections I became curious about the ANC presidential candidate Jacob Zuma. He is now president.

Apparently he is supported by the South African Communist Party and the trade unions.

A lurch to left in South Africa would be more than welcome after all these years of post-apartheid neoliberalism.

Does anyone know anything about Zuma, his leftism and all that?

[Ismail]

The SACP is reformist but was one of the premier movements that struggled to end apartheid. To my understanding though the SACP is in effect a 'pressure group' within the ANC, operating more as a lobby for labor concerns (unions, wages, etc.) than as an independent force. In this sense it's sorta like the CPUSA, which pretty much just tails the Democrats and tries to get them to go to the left, and if that fails then the CPUSA types just go "Oh well" and vote Democrat to "defeat the ultra-right." (Read: Republicans)

Zuma will probably be less neo-liberal (there was certainly enough ANC political infighting preceding the elections), but he's a social-democrat so don't expect anything notable. A genuine Communist would not be the ANC candidate.

[Zurdito]

There was a good article in Le Monde Diplomatique calling his style of politics "lumpen radicalism" and explianing how through clientelism, the ANC manages the opposition to its own neoliberal programs. This is something that happens in a lot of third world countries where you don't have a welfare state - strongmen can build up a power base through managing handouts to the poor at their discretion, and use these as allies against the organized working class.

My understanding is this: a lot of ex populist parties in Latin America in the 1990's turned to this brand of politics, and imperialism accepted them as the only effective way to implement neoliberal policies.

One potential contradiction with imperialism and classic "neoliberals" is the need to keep funding this clientelism, so in some ocncrete circumstances you might see some level of confrontation (Kirchner in Argentina or Zuma in SA being mild examples, someone like Ahmadinejad or Chavez being more radical examples - but all of them committed to opening up the country for foreign investment, privatization of key sectors of the economy, and attacking organized labour).

[turquino]

Zuma has dismissed talk from COSATU and the youth league about nationalizing the mines, but he is not totally free to carry on with his predecessor's neoliberalism because he owes much of his support to the left. We’ll have to see how his government reacts if the gold miners strike like they have been threatening to. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601116&sid=aVdS.k1gApO4

[manic expression]

The SACP is reformist but was one of the premier movements that struggled to end apartheid. To my understanding though the SACP is in effect a 'pressure group' within the ANC, operating more as a lobby for labor concerns (unions, wages, etc.) than as an independent force. In this sense it's sorta like the CPUSA, which pretty much just tails the Democrats and tries to get them to go to the left, and if that fails then the CPUSA types just go "Oh well" and vote Democrat to "defeat the ultra-right." (Read: Republicans)

Zuma will probably be less neo-liberal (there was certainly enough ANC political infighting preceding the elections), but he's a social-democrat so don't expect anything notable. A genuine Communist would not be the ANC candidate.

I haven't kept on top of South African politics, but it's a bit more complicated than that as far as I can tell. The SACP is an ally of the ANC in the tripartite alliance, and that stretches back to the struggle against apartheid, but the relationship isn't as cozy as it once was. Many South Africans are growing less and less patient in regards to the poverty facing so many Black Africans (and other groups) in the country; the ANC promised it would bring prosperity to all, and it hasn't so far. The tripartite alliance itself was in question a year or so ago, so it's not like the SACP is just an ANC-lackey (like the CPUSA and the Democrats).

As far as Zuma, I agree with what you said.

[Pogue]

Like the rest of the bourgeoisie leaders he'll capitulate, as he said he would, to the interests of the bourgeoisie.

[Demogorgon]

Jacob Zuma has solved the problem of deciding what political position to hold by holding every political position. To the SACP he is a Communist, to big business, he is a neo-liberal, to Afrikaaners he is the sort of man who will restore their prestige. To Zulus he wants to promote their culture above others, to other Blacks he is a firm believer in equality. To the West, he is the man who will bring Mugabe down. To his African neighbours he will take a moderate course barely harsher than Mbeki's and so on.

[Davie zepeda]

So who would you rather have in power in south African other than zuma?

[Revy]

So who would you rather have in power in south African other than zuma?

The proletariat :)

[Davie zepeda]

IN the current situation i mean of course that answer is obvious lol

[Charles Xavier]

Zuma is from the left of the ANC. He represents the defeat of the neoliberal branch of the coalition and their departure from the coalition.

[Ismail]

Zuma is from the left of the ANC. He represents the defeat of the neoliberal branch of the coalition and their departure from the coalition.Yes. As far as bourgeois democracy goes, he's the best choice right now.

[jake williams]

There was a good article in Le Monde Diplomatique calling his style of politics "lumpen radicalism" and explianing how through clientelism, the ANC manages the opposition to its own neoliberal programs. This is something that happens in a lot of third world countries where you don't have a welfare state - strongmen can build up a power base through managing handouts to the poor at their discretion, and use these as allies against the organized working class.

My understanding is this: a lot of ex populist parties in Latin America in the 1990's turned to this brand of politics, and imperialism accepted them as the only effective way to implement neoliberal policies.

One potential contradiction with imperialism and classic "neoliberals" is the need to keep funding this clientelism, so in some ocncrete circumstances you might see some level of confrontation (Kirchner in Argentina or Zuma in SA being mild examples, someone like Ahmadinejad or Chavez being more radical examples - but all of them committed to opening up the country for foreign investment, privatization of key sectors of the economy, and attacking organized labour).
This is a far better analysis than I could probably come up with, although I think the rough sketch of Ismail's comments are basically correct too, and I think the reality may be more moderate than this (can you find a link to the article? I'd like to read it).

Most of what I can contribute is impressions I've picked up through some family friends who are pretty close to Zuma. He's certainly better than Mbeki. As far as I can tell he's sort of a populist, he's got a lot of support in the party, especially the base, and most of the resistance to him (within the country) seems to be fearing that he's much more of a leftist than he actually is. I'm uncomfortable with the right wing (or to some degree liberal) opposition to him, but it's difficult for me to decide how he's actually going to function. I think it's likely, as Demogorgon suggested, that the face he's going to present to the public is not the way he's actually going to act in government. It's hard to say though, and I really haven't been following South African politics as much as I should have been.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Any proof of the SACP being reformist? Many of their documents seem to indicate otherwise.

[pastradamus]

So who would you rather have in power in south African other than zuma?

The Working Class of SA shouldn't be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils.

[pastradamus]

On another note, Forgive me but I just cant trust a guy with this background:

FROM THE BBC:

On the whole Rape/HIV issue with him.

Mr Zuma said in court on Wednesday he had left his bedroom after having sex with the woman and taken a shower because this "would minimise the risk of contracting the disease [HIV]"

[Mike Rotchtickles]

Zuma is from the left of the ANC. He represents the defeat of the neoliberal branch of the coalition and their departure from the coalition.
Many of the ANC leaders were SACP members, Mbeki included. Zuma and Mbeki left the SACP in the early nineties. Since than Zuma has never looked back. He has been riding the coatails of Thabo eversince until he got sacked and all of a sudden he was pro-poor. Everything Mbeki stood for Zuma was 100% for it until he got fired.


Jacob Zuma has solved the problem of deciding what political position to hold by holding every political position. To the SACP he is a Communist, to big business, he is a neo-liberal, to Afrikaaners he is the sort of man who will restore their prestige. To Zulus he wants to promote their culture above others, to other Blacks he is a firm believer in equality. To the West, he is the man who will bring Mugabe down. To his African neighbours he will take a moderate course barely harsher than Mbeki's and so on.

Can't say it better myself. The only good thing about the Zuma presidency is that the weak leadership he offers will quicken the revolution which has been building up since 1994. His fight with Mbeki caused alot of divisions within the ANC. Although he had said he would serve one term, there are mostly from the trade union Cosatu for him to extend his term to a second one. I bet if he takes that second term, the left will cry again for a third term because Zuma is their reliable horse that can get them irrelevant gains.

[Zurdito]

This is a far better analysis than I could probably come up with, although I think the rough sketch of Ismail's comments are basically correct too, and I think the reality may be more moderate than this (can you find a link to the article? I'd like to read it).

Only in Spanish sadly :(