i think we should look at reason why exist as the broad mass democratic
movement.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:44 PM, morgan phaahla <[email protected]>wrote:

>   Comrades, we seem to have a consensus on the timing of the succession
> debate. As it stands the debate was misplaced and not even appropriate. In
> fact, there was no compelling reason for the call to be made - let alone
> a need for it.
>
> If you twin both Floyd and Alex's submissions you will come to
> a determination that we come a long way with this debate and we seem to
> allow agitators to repeat history. All cadres of the movement know very well
> that the succession debate belongs to the ANC branches not anywhere else. It
> cannot always be spelled out to all and sundry that this is not a
> happy-go-lucky organisation but a movement of protocols?
>
> It's cause that anyone comrade who
> wishes to introduce a debate must channel it to the appropriate forum not
> anywhere he/she likes. As a youth movement, we must stand up against
> agitators and call order where it's necessary to defend the ANC culture and
> traditions.
>
> We don't have to stand on sideline when an alliance partner causes the
> confusion and get away with it because they are perceived to be kingmakers.
> There is no such a thing in the ANC - power belongs to the branches. We do
> not have so-called kingmakers as such things are foreign concepts created by
> the media.
>
> In a nutshell, let's not get distracted when there is a plethora of issues
> on the table as per mandates from Polokwane. We need to keep asking the NEC
> if it has been able to institute a specific programme aimed at restoring the
> unity and coherence of the ANC, the Alliance and the broader democratic
> movement. If not why? Because this is the very programme that hits at the
> core of the ANC's communications strategy at all levels of the organisation,
> including the Alliance and the broader democratic movement.
>
> The centre must hold, maqabane!
>
> Morgan Phaahla,
> Ekurhuleni
>
>
> "Sometimes, if you wear suits for too long, it changes your ideology." -
> Joe Slovo
>
> --- On *Sun, 7/5/09, Nyiko Floyd Shivambu <[email protected]>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Nyiko Floyd Shivambu <[email protected]>
> Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Re: Succession debate - the problems of short
> memory
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Sunday, July 5, 2009, 5:29 AM
>
>   I personally do no have a specific view around the whole succession
> debate, particularly concerning on who's supposed to start it. As a loyal
> member of both the YCL and ANC YL, I understand and agree with my
> organisations' positions on the issue. We however should not distort recent
> past history, for a simple reason that it is recent past history.My memory
> tells me that these are the facts:
>
>    - The ANC YL 22nd National Congress in Nasrec in 2004 did not resolve
>    on ANC succession.
>    - The 2004 Gauteng Provincial Congress had a discussion on leadership
>    issues towards the 52nd National Conference and the ANC YL said it's too
>    early and could be divisive.
>    - The ANC YL NEC resolved to support President Zuma for President and
>    went into a consultation with ANC YL structures.
>    - When Smuts Nghonyama responded affirming Gauteng's approach, then the
>    YL entered the debate premised first on the rights of President JZ and
>    secondly on the principle of two centres of power.
>    - The succession towards 52nd Conference was objectively underpinned by
>    strong organisational and ideological consequences, reflected recently by
>    the manifestations of the Conference aftermath, with the defeated faction
>    breaking away for political, ideological, personal, social and economic
>    reasons.
>    - The succession towards 52nd Conference was very divisive of all Mass
>    Democratic Movement structures including COSATU, SACP, ANC, YCL, ANC YL,
>    Parliamentary Caucus and government institutions in all spheres, and public
>    entities (SABC, IDC, DBSA, etc).... in one way or another, all these
>    structures suspended or expelled leaders on issues which were perceptibly 
> or
>    genuinely linked to the succession battles.
>    - The succession debate led to the abuse of State institutions at all
>    levels, including the Criminal Justice System and the intelligence.
>    - The succession towards 52nd National Conference also assisted to rid
>    the movement of counter-revolutionary forces within our structures, and
>    because it took time, assisted in the consolidation of a common perspective
>    moving forward.
>    - We have derived great and possibly durable lessons on the succession
>    towards Polokwane and certainly we cannot make the same mistake, whether we
>    take the issue now or later.
>
> These realities could possibly assist us in understanding both the YCL and
> ANC YL positions around the need to pursue/avoid the discussion now. I serve
> in both structures' national executive committee levels, and opine with
> almost certainty that if both were to pronounce the entirety of the
> leadership collectives for the 2012 Conference, there would be differences,
> except on President. This might lead to strengthening each organisations'
> positions and possible divergence, even on areas we could agree on moving
> forward. In its very nature, the succession debate is very subjective and
> could erupt people's emotions, thus blurring sober judgment on what is right
> or wrong. Whether the debate starts now or not is not the issue, but the
> issue is how differently do we handle the succession debate as compared to
> the period towards the 52nd National Conference. All revolutionaries will
> agree that our reasons for starting the succession debate now, cannot be the
> same as the reasons why it was started earlier towards the 52nd National
> Conference. I believe there should be greater involvement of our
> organisations' members on what they believe should be leadership post 2012.
> Otherwise I agree with both the ANC YL and YCL positions...... and these
> positions I can safely say are not personal positions of Julius Malema and
> David Masondo respectively, but organisational positions, which should be
> defended by all loyal members, avoiding separating leaders from their
> organisations.
>
> Floyd
>
> On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Alex M. Mashilo 
> <[email protected]<http://us.mc502.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> In 2002 the ANC held it 51st National Conference, followed two years
>> later, in 2004 by the ANCYL National Conference. From the YL conference the
>> stage was set for succession dedate, with the organisation arguing that
>> comrade JZ must in the next Conference of the ANC, to be held three years
>> later, in 2007, elected to succeed Thabo Mbeki as the movement's president.
>> This was linked to comrade JZ taking over as SA's president five years
>> later, in 2009.
>>
>> Thabo Mbeki did not like the YL's discussion. He said it was too early,
>> and that the ANC shall at the right time determine according to its
>> established procedures its next NEC which includes the president. Little he
>> make it clear that he was actually engaging with the YL's substative
>> proposal, with his position being that he did not like comrade JZ to become
>> the movement's president in 2007 and the SA's president in 2009, and that he
>> will acually contest and do many other things to gain a third term as ANC's
>> president.
>>
>> Those who don't quickly shut-down their memories will also recall that a
>> year (2003) after the ANC's 51st National Conference (2002, the ANC NEC
>> issued a statement stipulating that going forward the president of the ANC
>> may not be the president of the republic. Thabo Mbeki held interviews with
>> SABC in which he further motivated this position. Little did he make it
>> clear that he wanted to continue as ANC president in from 2007, four years
>> later.
>>
>> Following the 2004 and 2005 national and provincial elections two newly
>> appointed premiers in Limpopo (Sello Moloto, who later joined COPE) and KZN
>> (Sbusiso Ndebele), and a Mayor (Mlungisi Hlogwane, who later zigzagged
>> between COPE and ANC) for Sedibeng Municipality in Gauteng, went over to
>> call for the constitution of SA to be amended so Thabo Mbeki can serve a
>> third term as SA's president.Could this have been without tactical
>> coordination? Many of us questioned.
>>
>> But it was in 2004 that Thabo Mbeki condemed the YL for opening the
>> succession debate unnecessarily and too early.
>>
>> What are the similarities and different about the succession debate now
>> and then?
>>
>> Two years ago (2007) the ANC held its 52nd National Conference. The period
>> is the same (two years later if not almot)from ANC Nationl Conferences (51st
>> and 52nd respectively) between the YL's 2004 proposal for comrade JZ to be
>> elected ANC president in 2007 and Cosatu's 2009 proposal for comrade JZ to
>> continue as ANC and SA's president in 2012. Another similarity is that the
>> country went to general elections in 2004, as it has been the case in
>> 2009.Yet comrade Julius Malema, current serving president of the YL, like
>> Thabo Mbeki did to the YL in 2004, condemed Cosatu for raising the debate in
>> what is called too early. Malema uses one of the similar reasons used by
>> Mbeki when he, augmented by Smuts Ngonyama who since went to COPE, condemed
>> the YL. Like Thabo Mbeki, Malema argued that the succession debate is not
>> important now but service delivery is.
>>
>> What is different though, is that in 2004 the proposal for comrade JZ to
>> become president of the ANC in 2007 was made by the YL, and now (2009) it's
>> has been made by Cosatu, supported by the YCL.
>>
>> It is now clear whose interests did Thabo Mbeki represent when he
>> hypocriticallycondemed the so-called early succession discussion. Whose
>> interest does Malema represent when he wrongfully and passionately (without
>> even visiting the recent history of the YL on the issue of
>> succession)condemed Cosatu for openly stating its preference for comrade JZ
>> to continue in 2012 as both ANC and SA's president?
>>
>> In the Sasco NGC (1 - 5 July 2009) YCL National Chairperson comrade David
>> Masondo provided political education in a limited time slot. Indeed the ANC
>> is the organisational leader of the alliance, the allaince partners have an
>> inherent interest who therefore leads the ANC and how to express this is
>> only a matter for tactical consideratios. With the sort of response that
>> comrade Julius Malema echoed, it appears Cosatu was tactically correct to
>> state its preference openely. Otherwise our history illustrates that when
>> Thabo Mbeki condemed the YL in 2004 for raising the succession debate 'too
>> early' the mn was actually busy making sure he will stay on.
>>
>> To agree with comrade David Masondo, it will be utopian to suggest or
>> agree to be pursuaded that other forces are not busy discussing succession
>> in the corridors. In fact, making open pronouncements as Cosatu and the YCL
>> did this year (2009) abount comrade JZ continuing in 2012 and 2014 as
>> president of the ANC and SA, and as the YL did in 2004, threaten the
>> interests of those who are not only discussing succession in the corridors
>> but who are also preparing in the same sphere for their preferences to
>> emerge.
>>
>> A re boleleng!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> >
>


-- 
mtkunene

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to