MIM Notes 189 July 1 1999

SOUTH AFRICAN ELECTIONS USHER IN NEW STAGE OF STRUGGLE AGAINST 
NEO-COLONIALISM

By MC234

South Africa's June 2 elections have marked a new stage in the 
struggle of the Azanian people, one without the prestige of Nelson 
Mandela to cover for neo-colonialism. Mandela was the leader of 
the African National Congress revolutionary movement that fought 
the white apartheid system. Captured with the help of the Amerikan 
CIA, Mandela spent 27 years in prison. Released in 1990 after 
years of compromise negotiations, Mandela was elected president in 
1994. The prestige of Mandela kept the support of the Azanian 
masses while his willingness to sell out the long-term aspirations 
of the black masses to white power earned him the support of the 
white system.

The election of Thabo Mbeki, 56, could also mark a transition of 
Azanian subservience from South African white rule to the rule of 
international imperialism. While Mbeki poses more radical against 
the entrenched power of whites within South Africa by not 
pandering to white fears, he has also pledged to allow 
International Monetary Fund/World Bank structural adjustment 
loans, which Mandela would not. Such structural adjustment loans 
not only bind Third World countries with insurmountable debt, but 
also restructure the economy to prevent self-reliance. Whether the 
relationship between whites and the Azanians will change from 
Mbeki "alienating" whites, we can't predict.

Here's what Mbeki had to say on the question of imperialism to the 
Washington Post shortly before his election: "We were very pleased 
with the visit of President Clinton to Africa last year ... [O]ne 
of the wishes is that there would be sustained interest by the 
U.$. government in helping to meet the challenges of African 
development."

Mandela has kept himself above some of the details of the 
presidency. This keeps Mandela's legacy from getting the blame for 
the inevitable failures as well as grooms Mbeki for his election. 
In fact, Mandela was even calling Mbeki the "de facto 
president".(1)

The election of the African National Congress in 1994 and the five 
subsequent years has prompted praise from the imperialists for 
Mandela's leadership in lowering the sights of the national 
liberation movement. In the negotiations with the white South 
African system, Mandela and the ANC gave up their revolutionary 
goals. Now with five years in power, even Mandela's election 
promises have not come true, but the praise from imperialism 
continues to come in. Most major Amerikan newspapers ran days of 
coverage praising Mandela's "leadership" of the revolution. 

But what has that leadership gotten? Blacks make up 95% of those 
in poverty, and 70% of all black children are in poverty. Sixty-
five percent of blacks are considered poor, but only 1% of whites 
are.(3) Housing continues to be in short supply for blacks. 
Mandela promised to build a million homes, but so far construction 
has begun on only 600,000.(2)

It simply wasn't and will not be possible to fulfill the ANC's 
1994 election promises. The capital for such projects doesn't 
exist without redistributing the wealth. Apologists for inequality 
argue that the white's don't have enough wealth to entirely create 
a decent standard of living. But that's not point, as that ill-
gotten wealth could be used to fuel economic growth for all. With 
unemployment at 35%, and housing in short supply, it's obvious 
what needs to be done to move towards real development for 
Azanians.(3)

The Washington Post explains the Mandela strategy: "The government 
has been saddled with a complex balancing act between interests it 
hoped would converge, but instead have remained in competition. 
Black needs compete with white fears. Transformation competes with 
reconciliation." (3) In each of these contradictions, the latter 
has won out. 

The election of the ANC and the five years hence shows the failure 
of the ballot box as a revolutionary road. Negotiating with the 
white majority and then elected into the same system that 
oppressed them, the ANC had no choice but to appease whites. 
Whites in government jobs, including the military, were given 
lifetime tenure, for example. The property of whites -- realized 
through over a century of brutal exploitation -- was protected. 
The military could have overthrown the new South African 
government within days if it was not appeased, and with the whites 
in control of most resources, appeasement was necessary in the 
1990s. 

The road of appeasement has been the ANC's choice for over a 
decade. MIM and other anti-imperialists have long criticized the 
ANC for its approach of going to the other imperialists or the 
South African government for power, and not to the people. MIM 
advocated for South Africa a protracted people's war by which 
power can be wrested from the imperialist state piece by piece. 
Simultaneously, new institutions are created and developed to 
replace that of the imperialist state as it and its power is 
vanquished. This was the path taken by the Communist Party of 
China in the revolution there and is currently being taken by 
Maoist Parties around the world. 

So while the ANC led the struggle from colonialism to neo-
colonialism, the time has come for the people to organize for an 
end to colonialism in its entirety. That struggle will have to be 
against not only white power, but against the ANC puppets as well. 

"Reconciliation" has become merely a code word for ignoring 
structural inequality and going on with the oppressive system 
without the violence used to attack and defend it. Progress for 
the Azanians requires an end to the wholesale abandonment of 
revolutionary principles and a thorough revolution.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission

MIM Notes has repeatedly reported on the Truth and Reconciliation 
Commission. This was a body set up to give amnesty to anyone who 
would confess to political crimes. Some information about the 
dirty war against the revolution was given widespread press as a 
result of the Commission, but it served to subvert the masses 
desire for justice. (It also served to "equalize" the violence 
conducted by both sides of the revolution, as if each was equal in 
terms of quantity or morality.) A few low-ranking perpetrators of 
apartheid era violence confessed to crimes, and even implicated 
their superiors. But the top leaders of the country were not 
punished, despite their failure to confess their crimes.

In the past, MIM Notes has reported that former South African 
president Pieter W. Botha was found guilty of contempt for 
ignoring a subpoena the powerless Truth commission. The sentence? 
A meager $1,600 fine or a year in jail. But on June 1, this 
sentence was overturned on appeal because the law creating the 
Truth Commission had expired at the time of the subpoena.(4) 

Yet again, without a revolution, the biggest criminals get away 
with murder (literally).

Notes:
1. Washington Post June 9, 1999, A1
2. Washington Post June 3, 1999, p A19.
3. Washington Post May 31, 1999, A1, A20. Emphasis ours.
4. Washington Post June 2, 1999, p A18.