Greetings dear Pan Africanist, Great take cde Mmbara and Mashao, I want to confirm the reality that you've spoken about regarding comrades employed by parastatals and government. If you work for government and you support PAC you can't enjoy a right to express your differences with the ruling party. Any slight difference even if its on professional grounds is perceived as anti-ruling party.
We are often threatened with suspensions and dismissals for disagreeing with the ruling party. Your freedom of Expression and Association are impeded with impunity. If you don't adhere to the demands and whims of the ruling party you won't be promoted or short listed for senior positions even if you possess necessary skills, qualifications and competences. The above challenges and more not mentioned make it impossible to believe that you can produce a militant leader who works for government to lead PAC to state power. I agree wholeheartedly that if we want to lead a militant PAC to state power and to radically challenge the ruling party we must be full-time in PAC business. Izwe Lethu! Kwame Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you! -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] Sender: [email protected] Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 10:52:17 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PAYCO] Twin-Challenge for the PAC post 1994 I suppose your first paragraph is a microcosm of what our combat should entail. The rule is simple, if you are not prepared to die for it you simply can't have it. Contemporary history is abound with living testimonials to this line of thought. And indeed because the task of overthrowing capital and its handlers, national lackeys, is bound to be tough and most likely blood spilling, we must not allow peace-infested individuals to be at the helm of our vehicle for change - PAC. Here is another point I made before which I wish to reiterate. Let us face it, crude. How possible is it for a government, parastatal or capital employed person to lead a rise against the ruling party and the obtaining system? The answer is pretty easy to fathom. It is near impossible to expect that a person would stand against his employer or master unless they have decided to let go. In my view anyone wanting to serve in the national leadership of the party can't be employed by any of these institutions. Other means of employ or survival will have to be explored. Our lives and everything must depend on the PAC getting it right with the African masses. It can't be a case of if the PAC works am fine and if it doesnt I will go and serve the ANC structures in my job. With this set up we will be expecting a fear struck person, almost on guard all the time to protect a job, to do or say something to risk that noble job. I have had comrades who could not issue any adverse statements against govt simply because it has consequences for them. And they are right. The sacrifices that need to be made by especially those who aspire to lead, is to dedicate their full being and future to the party. PAC is not a job, it is a calling and a job only in that sense! They must know that even their natural desire for good life is linked to the party and will come true only when they have set the party right with the masses. Personally this is what I want to hear amongst others, from anybody wanting to replace the current incumbents at the helm of the party. It cannot be a reaffirmation of the status quo, it has to be a complete change of the party s way of doing things, and then a complete new society, founded on Pan Africanist ideals. All these must complement our review of the history and personality of whosoever wishes to take up the role of a commander in chief of the party and possibly the country. People who are prepared for"asazi iyo zala nkomoni" as Sobukwe said. People who are ready to operate in uncertainty including whether or not they will be alive still when victory is attained. Izwe Lethu ! IAfrika! Matome Mashao Sent from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: "Hulisani Mmbara " <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 09:47:24 To: PAYCO GOOGLE GROUP PAYCO GOOGLE GROUP<[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PAYCO] Twin-Challenge for the PAC post 1994 Thanks comrade Mashao for the input, it has depth and context. I still say only those who are prepared to die for the cause of our people should lead. And I mean die as in "the biological disintegration of body, soul and spirit" and the body becomes lifeless. Lack of commitment to die for the cause is lack of commitment to the cause itself. Indeed leadership must informed by a programme of action, without which the leadership question is reduced to just another fashion parade about who is better between me and the next person. Such a contest has no ideological content, no intended plan of action to make the political line of the party a guide to people struggles, right through to the corridors of power not for power's sake but to change the course of society and history to reflect the world as we see/want it. The programme of action of the party must be the one which reject the song and dance of the ruling establishment. That rejection must exist in action and not only in our minds or speeches. You disagree with the ruling establishment but are prepared to leave under it anyway and remain a marginal party while your people continue to suffer. As I have said previously, this tacit collaboration and an act of cowardice. We must be frank and robust. Let's shed liberalism and be critical of the self and the other. It is the only way we can build a strong cadreship and a revolutionary vanguard party. Some people are just scared even of having a robust debate with their fellow comrades. They prefer to talk about peace, love, unity and administration. This elevation of administration on its own is academic. The proof of administration is in its practice. Just to talk administration from a text book point of view as is the case in the current discourse, is meaningless. Every situation produces its own circumstances and dictates its own tools of administration to make it produce the desired results. Besides, there is no administration to talk of where there is no programme of action. The former supports the latter. As I was still saying, let's have a frank conversation. If we can't confront each other and engage robustly, how can we confront the enemy? Are we going to preach peace, love, and unity between us and the enemy? Let's talk. Izwelethu! Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you! -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:01:57 To: <[email protected]> Subject: [PAYCO] Twin-Challenge for the PAC post 1994 What exactly is at the root of PAC 's deterioration over the years, particularly since 1994? Is it the party 's ineptitude to provide a programme of action or is it the weakness of the leadership, or for that matter both and more? These questions have seized the party and all of its organic membership for sometime now. I want to deal with both the leadership issue and how I think it gets distorted by the day, and then the program of action. For the party to assume its rightful place in society, the leadership thereof is integral and a key enabler. We must define what we need in a leadership collective and individual persons thereof. For qualification into leadership one must fully and completely comprehend the party s pan africanist position on all facets of life. I suggest that this understanding cannot be derived solely through academic read. It grows out of practical engagement with the challenges of the party and thus its ideological stand. The inadequacy of ideological orientation may at first look or thought make for an insignificant area of concern. This is a red light signaling going concern challenges for any organisation. The want to drive party programs outside of party ideology is enemy number one to the survival of the PAC. Persons who harbour this view are either grossly ill intended or dangerously naïve. The naïve pursue this line of thought because political leadership is mere administrative governance. This is the type of mentality that must be assaulted in every way possible. In their view the party 's challenges stem from poor admin, and that if we had a strong administration our fortunes will change. In fact this group hold the same view about the governance of the country. They take a view that what the country needs is a strong administrative arm. There is absolutely no intention to change the direction and remodel a new society and trajectory. This sect also takes a view that therefore people that have no prestigious academic qualifications are ill qualified to lead the party because 'their admin capacity is weak.' And as can be seen, this group would have no reason not to join other parties including the ruling, because in their view the problem is admin and not foundational orientational ideological issues. I make no suggestion that admin is not important, I am only seeking to highlight a possible danger on the exaggeration of admin over the political line. Another sect of the "admin over politics" group is those with ill intentions. These ones only look at leadership as an opportunity for prestige in society and they actually don't stand for anything. Some of them articulate the party line fairly well but in their hearts of hearts mean the opposite or nothing. This cancerous infection needs to be dealt with decisively before it spreads accross the body. We all know that the standards in the party have been severely lowered so much so that every jack and tom can lay claim to the leadership of the party. There is a few things we must do to combat this. We must look at two things, history and personality. We must take a closer look at everyone laying claim to the leadership of the party. We must ask the question, who are you and where do you come from. All parties the world over do this ! And it is important to look at a person s involvement in the party. This is not whether or not they have made mistakes but more on whether they have engaged in party work so much so that we can safely say this chap is PAC even by his manners and outlook. It also must not be enough that a person has served in one structure or the other. There are a lot of circumstantial accidents where totally unfit persons have held "leadership" positions and want to use this to perpetuate themselves. We must curtain these accidents and not feed them. The other aspect we must look at is personality. The PAC cannot be led by gentlemen whose complete orientation is peace and maintence of the status quo. This has been the party s challenge. What is required is the leadership that will confront the system and its handlers. We must add that this confrontation cannot be waged through a suit and tie in a boardroom. It involves a lot of sacrifices and the courage of character. To think that one who has not even had the gut to tell an ant to get away can lead the PAC must be a joke par excellence. For the party to rise, it can't be on the back of some textbook gentlemanish leadership philosophy. So let us look at the personality of the person before we even think too far off their competence and liver capacity. The second challenge is that of the programme of action. First it must be noted that for a programme to exist there must be leadership because the program does not develop itself. The PAC has all the foundational base for a program. In conclusion, it is important that when we discuss leadership we should not do so from a "swapping" mentality, I.e changing this face for the next one. It must be a program, that which the person professes and is able to execute that must inform the move. We have been this route before and I insist that this time we shall do it right. Leadership review must be informed by a program and not a person s qualification or face differentiation to the incumbents. This is my contribution to the ensuing debate regarding the future of the organisation, analysis and recommendations. Izwe Lethu !! IAfrika ! Matome Mashao Sent from my BlackBerry® -- 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 <http://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 -- 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
