Hi, welcome to my Poliseries: an exploration of the vision each parliamentary party has for South Africa’s future. The topic I explore in this regard is land reform. In this report, I discuss ActionSA: technically a first-born bastard of the DA (depending on whether one also considers GOOD a DA bastard) having been founded by a former Johannesburg mayor of the long-time opposition party: Herman Mashaba. This, shortly after his exodus from the party, decrying its apparent apathy to unseat the ANC due to its comfort in being the country’s leading opposition. This apathy or lack of political will to materialize envisioned change is why Mashaba demoted the DA, in his eyes, as an organization that does not respect the structural mission of all political parties: maintain the health of the nation by servicing its people. To him, I argue that the DA and its nemesis: the ANC are, as enemies often are, two sides of the same coin; both falling short of the means required to foster in the futures they’ve promised. Both, now existing as parasites, the ANC feeding off of the inadequacies of the past Apartheid government; and the DA alongside all other political parties, on those of the ANC.
To ActionSA, this refusal to function ‘optimally’ by these political parties is a symptom of a political system broken by corrupt activity unperturbed. Land reform, alongside all other spheres of governance, has been infected with said activity and disillusionment with the DA does not discredit the party’s ideas in this regard of which Mashaba chose to share. Case-in-point, this is the only other party (aside from the DA) to state, explicitly, its support for the High-level Panel Reports recommendations within its promotional material. With that said, ActionSA is mostly on the same page as the DA (and those parties previously discussed that so align) with regards to the land question. Its answer is a resounding “no” to expropriation without compensation (EWC) based on the belief in individual ingenuity, hard work, and collective resilience to break the current correlation between race and economic standing. In other words: the currently disadvantaged must be given equitable opportunity to earn a better standard of living rather than being granted freebies via equitable outcome initiatives such as Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE), affirmative action and EWC.
“The best lies are based on the truth, at least in part”.
- Cassandra Clare, Clockwork Angel (The Infernal Devices, #1) https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/473040-the-best-lies-are-based-on-the-truth-at-least
I believe the quote above says it best: people must earn what they receive through their hard work and ingenuity for resources to be managed efficiently enough to sustainably maintain the social structure; this is true. However, equitable opportunity as a policy, must not only be systematic: that is, a method of the socio-economic system but also systemic: intrinsic to the foundation hence nature thus culture of the system itself. Our system, comprising of employers and employees, is inherently unequal due to its foundation upon historical social injustices, in South Africa, this inequality correlates to racial identity. The system depends on this inequality for its optimal efficiency. Simply slapping this policy onto it like a sticker is tantamount to presenting it as in a form different to its own: presenting it as a system of equality (of opportunity) when such is untrue. History has rendered the current disparities between, mainly, blacks and whites; now this, in-and-of-itself, is not the problem – the problem is that the rendering of this inequality was not natural but itself a deliberate implementation of the inequality-of-outcome to advantage the whites. Affirmative action policies like BBBEE are a one-to-one equality-of-outcome response to the adverse effects of historical inequality-of-opportunity and outcome initiatives of colonial and Apartheid governments.
“Breaking the cycle of racial inequality requires that we take action to implement real and substantive policies aimed at improving equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.”
ActionSA’s recognition of the abovementioned race-to-economic standing correlation inadvertently gives credence to the bigger problem: that of economic inequality irrespective of race. However, its equitable opportunity strategy to fix racial inequality overtly, and I argue purposefully, overlooks this problem, and simply focuses on giving the disadvantaged more advantage. Racial inequality is a form of the economic inequality inherent to our economic system – the system’s nature in this regard thus the system itself is the problem here. Simply granting the disadvantaged an opportunity previously out of their reach, yes, may make them less disadvantaged, materially speaking, by making them more comfortable ‘slaves’ but, systemically/economically speaking, does not change their overall predisposition; they are still slaves relative to their masters – the advantaged. This strategy simply pits the advantaged against the disadvantaged, in ‘equal opportunity’, for a better standard of living; the former for a chance at attaining it and the latter at maintaining it. All this, while ignoring the unequal economic backgrounds from which each approaches this opportunity – a deeper, more structural inequality that reduces the chances of success in competition for the disadvantaged thereby perpetuate itself, if not in race, then in other forms.
“The painful legacy of our past has been perpetuated by the post-democratic government. Too many South Africans still live without access to quality education, basic services, and proper housing. This must change”.
Again, as shown above, ActionSA acknowledges this structural problem but chooses to ignore it. Rather, it opts to facilitate an environment in which ‘anyone’ can fulfil his/her potential; an environment enabled, in this case, by its intended increase in efficiency of the Land reform process and crack down on corruption. This realization of personal potential through one’s hard work and ingenuity, to the party, is the adhesive needed to establish and maintain the social cohesion meant to redress past injustices.
To this party, the land issue is primarily one of economic development – not social justice. Addressing this issue entails delivering on efficiency and corruption targets necessary to demonstrate policy certainty and attract greater investment for the creation of more jobs. ‘Appease the disadvantaged by giving them more things and ways of attaining them by way of land and housing via government-private sector subsidies and jobs provided primarily by the private sector, i.e., the advantaged.’ Specific to this issue, economic development is divided into two areas: rural and urban. Although both will be catered to similarly with regards to land and housing (albeit urban housing is more price & location-sensitive due to it being in higher demand), rural area job creation will be centred on the agricultural sector and its assurance of our food security.
With the now well-known farm attacks being a central concern, ActionSA intends for our agricultural sector to be the South African Development Community’s (SADC) food basket by addressing rural safety for farm owners and workers alike. Additionally, also in partnership with the private sector, oversee specialised skills development and transfer that involves the shared ownership of farms between their owners and workers to ensure responsible thus inclusive sector development.
In urban areas, development will focus on more generalised entrepreneurship and expanding access to affordable housing. The former, as already mentioned, through facilitating a stable economic environment attractive to investment; and the latter, aside from the methods previously discussed, by re-zoning abandoned buildings and handing over their ownership (unclear if this means ‘selling’ or simply ‘giving’ at no cost) to private property developers for re-purposing. Private sector finance providers will be depended upon by the party’s government to supply innovative financing options to enable the abovementioned access.
This capitalist take on land reform which rests upon staunch protectionism of property rights fuels the party’s opposition to the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act’s (ULTRA) pending amendments. ULTRA’s purpose is to enable a legal mechanism for the conversion (in this case – ‘upgrading’) of land tenure rights: rights on the occupation of a specific piece of land by agreement with its owner e.g., leasehold, deed of grant etc., to those of ownership. A mechanism that entails a process whereby the owner of a portion of land submits to the deeds registry a certificate of ownership titled in the name of the current land occupant hence intended recipient as a formal request of ownership transfer between the two. Whereas initially, this request would be granted/denied by the registrar of deeds, the abovementioned amendments transfer that role to the Minister of Public Works and Land Affairs by altering the process. Post amendments, the landowner is ‘pushed aside’ so-to-speak: his/her intent to transfer ownership no longer kick-starts the process; the tenure-right holder can do so independently of that intent by applying for the conversion of his/her tenure-rights to ownership with the Minister’s department. The Minister will then publish his/her intention to approve said application in the Government Gazette from when the owner of the land is given 30 days to object.
Upon receipt of the lodged objection, the Minister will have to institute an inquiry to establish circumstantial facts which will assist him/her to come to a final decision. If promulgated, these amendments will effectively disempower the landowner whose only defence thereon will be the inquiry. I agree with ActionSA’ opposition here: a socio-economic system wherein tenants can ‘simply’ take land/property from their landlords will be unsustainable. However, these amendments, alongside affirmative action initiatives, represent a mentality best encapsulated as a cry-out from a place of trauma and resentment, a place both systemic and systematic in its embodiment of capitalism’s inequalities. I predict that ActionSA’s attempt to build its future South Africa in such a place will lead it into a situation in which the ANC finds itself today: receiving criticism based on inequality-observable inefficiencies that, altogether, encapsulate corruption. This wheel will keep on turning until we realize the root problem of all the ANC’s criticisms – the system itself which, as shown by their ineffectiveness (which I argue is on purpose) throughout the years, is supported by all political establishments.
Comentarios