Comrades My take on the points raised - regarding interaction with the Pan Africanists on an international scale, internal party structures needing resources, and related matters on the revival of the PAC - is that we should avoid skimming over the core difficulties and raise the discussions to a strategic level. Otherwise it is the 'same old, same old' tired excuses and explanations, and the self-flagellation we bring upon ourselves on the Party's failures takes the discussions nowhere. Sigidagida ndawo yodwa nje nge 'zangoma. We live in a modern world of global capitalism with very serious challenges of the super-exploitation of citizens in each state where they exist, and to pretend as if we are a unique group with special properties for the revolution is a bit rich and self-delusion. I don't mean to sound condescending, but we should all face reality squarely on and then come with meaningful contributions to elevate ourselves out of the quagmire and political conundrum, and discharge our revolutionary responsibilities with our heads held up high.
Many scientific studies on organisations have been made, and the common trait and finding is that structure follows strategy. How would the PAC do better in its turn-around by only emphasising structure and demanding loyalty from those considered its members? The structure becomes an empty vessel if it is not informed by a strategic direction, a vision for the future of where we want to be and a clearly defined mission of what needs to be done presently and consistently until we get there. Except for inheriting the political legacy of the early Africanists (abo-Sobukwe, Mda, etc.), we seem to have blundered ourselves into a stupor of internal blame games (at least over the past sixteen years) and it has grown like cyst, festered like pus and now reached fatal proportions. The incumbents who hold office always blame the rest of us who hold critical opinions on their ineptitudes and their lack of strategy to take the Party forward. The strategic process is all encompassing, and can be reached by persuasion and debate in a free-from-constraints forum. The outcomes of the Yenan Forum, for instance, led to a grossly hamstrung revolutionary group of about 80 collectively implementing a strategy that led to the Chinese Communist Party takeover of state power in 1949. Zanu cadres in Zambia, finding themselves rudderless after the assassination of Herbert Chitepo, opted for a no-nonsense revolutionary path to free Zimbabwe with correct personalities to do just that in leadership, forcibly recalled Mugabe and Edgar Tekere, who thereafter brought in a collective including bo-Muzenda, Zvobgo, etc., and defeated Ndabaningi Sithole with his Zanu (Ndonga) that conformed to the machinations of Ian Smith. Let me make crude examples on the home front: (1) in 1975 the ANC in exile was in shambles, riddled with factions and hopelessly without direction and a support base inside the country - they regrouped and sought guidance from the Vietnamese, and changed tactics and structures on the basis of a renewed strategy for revival. They are in government today. (2) The very liberal Democratic Party had six National Assembly representatives in 1994 and were called names such as 'small chihuahua party'. They devised a strategy, opened out and swallowed up the Nats, and are the Democratic Alliance today, commanding a strong political presence with overtures to the disenchanted black middle class. It is not by mistake: there is a strategy. Did all these organisations quibble with mundane things such as membership subscriptions and name calling, or did they make an honest appreciation of their circumstances to re-work a strategy for their revival and turnaround? Our mission is to implement the Programme of Action of 1949 (read this to mean strategy - which is revisited and upgraded from time to time) in order to meet the objectives of the African Revolution. Those 'Africanists' who think that by merely asking everyone to conform to dues and discipline, the PAC's profile will rise, are themselves one-sided and factionalist, and doomed to failure. Burial societies to a large degree take this approach, and they verily bury themselves without fail. Their intended aim is to take their members to the grave - literally. They have never really regrouped and analysed their environment afresh, performed a SWOT analysis, made strategic plans to enhance the living conditions of their membership, consciously drove this programme in action and reached desired goals. They are static, claiming to be custodians of traditions, and have become reactionary. Who said the aim of our communities is to get decent burials when we die, but exist miserably by eking out like slaves. I am here making an analogy for the failures of a one-sided structural approach. No doubt, it takes away the revolutionary zeal. It is no wonder that the real battle in the Party is for a place to be in the municipal council or to defend your status as member of parliament, where the remunerations and pecks are grand. That is why some ran away with seats and their cheque book branches, or went on to form their own parties where they'd go for the same things without the stress of facing scrutiny by your peers. These are all fakes and pretenders - not revolutionary Pan Africanists. It does not take a genius to comprehend this. To reduce the political heritage of Lembede and Pokela into a sect of like minded people is completely wrong. What do we really have to hide? We are blessed with a rich diversity of thought leaders and cadres who pledge their allegiance to Sobukwe wholeheartedly but question the viability of the PAC (Sobukwe's political vehicle) under these circumstances to make an impact on SA's politics and national agenda. They argue from legal, religious, economic, sociological, political, and whatever angle - and are acknowledged as competent individuals and groups in their own right. They cut across the age gap and struggle generations spectrum, and even the ethno-tribal divide. How do you rope them in in order to benefit from their skills and knowledge, and do cross pollination of ideas, when we have hostile gatekeepers and arrogant twerps set up as attack dogs to protect their masters and controllers, and to subtly push the PAC down a slippery slope? I hope and trust that the youth and other social formations of Pan Africanists will raise the bar and discuss these matters like real revolutionaries. Period. Jaki From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [PAYCO] ECONOMICS OF POLITICAL FORMATIONS Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:41:13 +0200 Cde Themba, Thank you for raising such crucial matters. I must say though that there are consistent cadres who have tirelessly dedicated their resources and energies to the party. The questions of affliation fees is a rather touchy subject. I know many branches across the country that for years paid their dues including membership fees and never got cards or any service to acknowledge their contribution. That in itself inspires very little confidence on members to continue paying their dues. Its another thing to advocate commitment bottom-up, but i think the PAC has lacked when it comes to commitment top-down; members pay fees and not recieve membership cards, members pay their fees and still have to buy party t-shirts at rallies and conferences. While i have no qualms about commitment i think we must also start calling on the "leadership" of the party to account on resources, to explain to members why they are cardless members while their dues are paid. The PAC mother body has failed to support even its component structures regardless of their standing. As PAYCO we are faced with the same challenges that you raise comrade and have so far survived on a shoe string budget through the commitment of cadres who contribute monthly or otherwise. But we cannot now cull debate and political discourse simply because of resources issue. PAYCO has employed many freely available resources to mitigate the effects of lack of resources to instill debates and discource in the organisation; this forum and Mayihlome News are examples. And if we were to required that one need to be a member if the Fullest sense of the word before anything else we would be abondoning our mandate as a revolutionary party for the masses, the poor and the downtrodden who may not have resources to pay their due. Ours is to mobilise resources, whatever little maybe available, towards empowering our broader members with ideoligical armourment to ensure that they are resourcesful in whatever sphere of life they may find themselves. That being said your point is still crucial and we need to contribute to the organisational apparatus materially to ensure its continutity. Izwe Lethu! Dzumbu > Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:00:52 -0700 > Subject: [PAYCO] ECONOMICS OF POLITICAL FORMATIONS > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > Sons & Daughters of the Comtinent! > I,firstly must introduce myself. My name is Oyama Themba Rwaxa I have > been in the "Party" since 1987. I joined AZANYU fore-runner to PAYCO > then and have been in the "Party" since. My concern regards us as > "members" who do not offer nothing to the "Party" so it is able to > Disburse is Obligations as they become due - ie Pay rent,fone & other > overheads IN TIME. This requires dedicated members who FIRST make > certain that the "Party" is able to OPERATE before they can say the > "Party" EXISTS. For anyone not to FIRST RESPECT the "Party" by > disbursing on the responsibility of paying SUBSCRIPTIONS ON TIME > before engaging on ANY subject /Topic/Issue is not ON. Cdes seem to > think that the PAC and its Organs/Affiliates OPERATE on "Holy spirit". > Also the is a tendency to go on a leave of ABSENCE and come /leave > when their whims tell them to. We need to have a system wherein we are > PRIMARILY are members in the FULLEST sense before we can Do > anything,for Cdes to leave only to return claiming to be "Party" > members is not only ERRENEOUS but "counter-revolutionary" as well.This > means Joe Seremane & others who were previously members can come & > Destabilise US anytime saying "Nam ndingum 'Afrika'. Thats where we > need to statr ,everything else will follow. No one is BIGGER than the > Revolution INCLUDING Mothopeng ,Sobukhwe & others. No organisational > Discipline NO 'Party' > > Izwe lethu!!! > > -- > Sending your posting to [email protected] > > Unsubscribe by sending an email to [email protected] > > You can also visit http://groups.google.com/group/payco > > Visit our website at www.mayihlome.wordpress.com -- Sending your posting to [email protected] Unsubscribe by sending an email to [email protected] You can also visit http://groups.google.com/group/payco Visit our website at www.mayihlome.wordpress.com -- Sending your posting to [email protected] Unsubscribe by sending an email to [email protected] You can also visit http://groups.google.com/group/payco Visit our website at www.mayihlome.wordpress.com
