Brilliant piece. I have learnt a lot from these piece, the style and sequencing and politics. Thanks Cde Buti.
Kind regards, Cedric Sabelo Gina On 04 Mar 2011, at 15:46, Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> wrote: > > <ANCtodayNew.gif> > > > Score not cheap political points > > > Buti Manamela, VIEWPOINT, ANC Today, Johannesburg, 4 March 2011 > > Two issues ago the ANC Today published an article by ANC Youth League > Spokesperson, Comrade Floyd Shivambu which in our view fails to contribute > qualitatively towards: (1) the national and internal alliance discourse on > questions such as the role and unity of the alliance, (2) the role of the > SACP and working class parties in South Africa and the world, (3) the > autonomy of the communist youth movement within the revolution, and (4) the > national growth path and seizure of economic power. > > So what? > > After careful reading of Cde Floyd's article, I asked myself: SO WHAT? This > is because I had just read a small piece of factional propaganda that is > extremely paranoid (such as "lies and conspiracies being spread against youth > leadership...at the forefront of the revolution" and extremely > anti-communist). This is very unfortunate. > > Yes, the youth were mobilised to overthrow Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Ben Ali > in Tunisia. So what does this have to do with the so-called neo-liberal > nature of the communist party lately or some adventure that Cde Floyd calls a > revolution? Yes, the South African Communist Party's (SACP) initial reaction > welcomed and fully backed the objectives of GEAR...so what? And what about > the SACP's role in relation to GEAR going forward thereafter? Why is that > revolutionary role downplayed? What are the intentions of that downplaying? > > Yes, some youth leaders in their time and prime made an impact in > participating in transforming society from oppression, imperialism and > anti-capitalism...so what - more so that there are other young leaders who > either became a bag of cabbage or were used by leaders such as Hitler under a > so-called National Socialism (read fascism, which ultimately inspired > organisations such as the AWB). > > The ANC is the leader of all forces towards the attainment of the main > objectives of the National Democratic Revolution...now what does this have to > do with the role of young people in Egypt' or any of the fantasies propagated > by Cde Floyd? > > There are also some matters of fact and of ideological inconsistency abused > or scorned by Cde Floyd either to claim easy victories and score cheap > political points, or to bestow solely the tasks of our current revolution to > himself and some within the ANC Youth League in order for them to be in the > hall of fame as mentioned in the extract from Cde Malema's Political Report > to the last ANC Youth League National General Council. > > These matters of fact and ideological inconsistency relate to what we mean by > autonomy and whether a stratum or a class can drive revolutions. Even the > word revolution is itself abused as a single action by the youth in having > participated in activities that led to the resignations of Mubarak and Ben > Ali in Egypt and Tunisia. > > Eyes closed > > I raise these points as the main pillars of the article by Cde Floyd because > each time he advances a point to justify his factional and anti-communist > rhetoric he closes his eyes before the truth, and then proceeds to another > dreary pontificating. Let's take each in turn. > > Firstly, elementary political education teaches us that revolutions happen > when the revolutionary class overthrows the ruling class and assumes power. > Importantly, revolutions are completed after destructing the old order" > including the old state and when "revolutionaries help build a new state (and > not just government) that adheres to the emerging social relationships. This > is why we characterized ours as a breakthrough and a transition, not > necessarily a revolution, and has since been implementing (regardless of > disagreements of this or that tactic) the National Democratic Revolution > (which is a process and not an event). > > Without undermining the advances made by young people in Egypt, it is > important to point out that the military (very much part of the state that > has been and is still in place) they seized power and are in the process of > determining the transitional rules (the constitution and election date) as a > result of the breakthrough (the forced resignation of Mubarak). This, unlike > what happened in our country in the late 80's and early 90's is not an > inclusive process but a military-handled process. > > The millions who filled the Tahir Square are not involved in the negotiations > process towards the breakthrough, but the military council which seized power > and the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt is yet to fulfil the basic characteristics > of a revolution, let alone Tunisia. This is introduction to political > education that I expected Cde Floyd to appreciate since he refers to himself > as a revolutionary (and is responsible for political education in the ANCYL). > > To forget that "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history > of class struggle" and to fragment the antagonistic classes in terms of age > is the neglect of elementary political education. > > The thrust of Cde Floyd's argument is that "it is the youth in South Africa > and everywhere else that are the seed of the revolution" and not the working > class or its party. Thus, he commits another negligence of the elementary > political education in reducing the Party to the Class, and the ANCYL to the > youth (strata). In doing this Cde Floyd conflates many misconceptions. In the > first place you can't counter-pose "youth" (a generational category) and > "class" as if we have to choose between them. > > Cde Floyd also refers to militancy. In the second place, militancy and a > revolutionary position are not necessarily and universally the same thing. > Yes, young people are often in the forefront of militant democratic action > (as we have recently seen in Tunisia and Egypt) - but militant action is not > necessarily and inherently progressive or revolutionary. Demagogically > mobilized youth have been the street-fighters on behalf of emergent fascist > regimes in Germany and Italy, and martyrs on behalf of reactionary > fundamentalist movements, mouthpieces and militants or youth militia of > reactionary forces as partially indicated earlier. > > Playboy lynched > > Cde Floyd might also want to reflect on the fact that the prime target of > popular revenge in Tunisia was a youthful playboy relative of the deposed > President Ben Ali. This particular relative was lynched in the course of the > uprising, and he was especially unpopular because of the extravagant parties > that he threw, flaunting his wealth in a society beset with mass youth > unemployment. > > In the third place, Cde Floyds potted history tells us that revolutions are > led by the youth Lenin was young in 1917, Fidel was young in 1959, etc. But > Lenin in 1917 did not think of himself as a "youth" per se. His break with > the Mensheviks was not based on a generational divide or ageism, but on > principled ideological politics. Yes, Fidel was young in 1959. But did he > cease being revolutionary as he grew older? > > What about leaders who were more mature at the time of the revolutionary > breakthrough in their countries, say, Ho Chi Minh? And what about those who > led us to our 1994 revolutionary breakthrough - Mandela, Tambo, Sisulu, > Slovo, Hani and so forth, who never ceased to be revolutionary once they had > lived beyond their youth. In fact, when Mandela spoke about, for instance, > nationalization as a policy that the ANC should advance, he was more than > double the age of Cde Floyd and did not qualify to be called youth. > > Of course, the youth question in our country and throughout, particularly, > the Third World is of paramount importance. The capitalist agrarian > revolution in the South is uprooting millions of former peasant households, > leading to rapid and squalid urbanization and wage-less proletarianisation. > The protracted global capitalist crisis (that dates back to at least the late > 1990s) has further impacted on Third World workers and lower-middle strata. > Unemployment, and particularly youth unemployment (a massive 74% in Egypt) is > at crisis levels and the recent events in the Arab world need to be analyzed > contextually and taken into consideration as well. Those bearing the brunt of > the crisis are, essentially, working class youth - which is why it is so > misguided to counterpose youth and workers. > > It is also factually wrong to underestimate the critical role played by the > employed and unionized working class in both Tunisia and Egypt. In the latter > case, for instance, a general strike involving transport and other workers > were central to the demise of Mubarak. Of course, we should also not assume > that there would always be a spontaneous alliance between youth movements, > and trade unions and left-wing parties. The relative defeat of the youth and > student uprisings in France, Germany and Italy in 1968 is a case in point. By > contrast, successful revolutions (as in Cuba) succeeded in uniting trade > unions, the youth and student movements, the peasantry, a national movement > and a communist party in a common programme of action. > > An attempt to rewrite history > > Also, selectively pointing out to the immediate reaction of the SACP towards > GEAR as constituting neo-liberalism by the Party and judging its capacity to > lead the working class towards a revolution constitute weak intellectual > opportunism and an attempt to rewrite history. > > Cde Floyd deliberately chooses to forget, young as he is and recent as the > facts are, that it is the Party that came to characterise the pre-Polokwane > internal ANC and Alliance crises as being caused by the 1996 class project. > He also selectively forgets that immediately after that statement, the SACP > has and still remain committed to opposing the macro-economic paradigm as > imposed by GEAR. > > It was the SACP that introduced the critique of neo-liberalism into our > movement in the early 1990s, and from the middle of 1996 it was the SACP that > LED a consistent struggle against GEAR. Of course Cde Floyd holds his breath > when he is about to tells us about the role of prominent ANC YL leaders who, > long after 1996, without exception supported GEAR and maliciously attacked > the SACP and COSATU, portraying their anti-neoliberal stance as an "attack on > the ANC". > > The SACP has never regarded these mistakes by the ANCYL leadership as a > reason to write off the ANCYL as "inherently neo-liberal". We cannot also say > because in the first bilateral meeting between the ANC Youth League and the > Young Communist League of South Africa (YCLSA) the former dismissed the > latter's campaign for the expropriation of mines and free education as > outdated and failed USSR socialism - then the ANCYL is neoliberal. > > New Growth Path > > The only current issue that Cde Floyd appears to disagree with the SACP on is > its "general" support for government's New Growth Path. He is not interested > in explaining why the SACP's "general" support for New Growth Path is wrong. > He simply throws this and a whole lot of garbled potted history into the > fray. > > As a matter of fact, and not fictitious imagination, the SACP welcomed the > tabling of the New Growth Path as marking a paradigm shift and resolved to > deal with its details through a thoroughgoing internal process of > consultation in order to respond comprehensively to the details. Cde Floyd's > engagement is not a critical engagement with any particular perspective > emanating from the SACP, or from comrades within the SACP, but an attack on > the SACP in general. > > Indeed in seeking to advance his half-baked anti-communism Cde Floyd begins > to write off communist parties all over the place - whether in Venezuela in > the present, or in Cuba prior to 1959, or Latin America over the past > decades. The SACP and no doubt various other communist parties are not > infallible. But the spirit of Cde Floyds piece is not to point out mistakes > (real or imagined), but to factionally condemn the Party. > > Obsessed with factional aggression > > Instead of being obsessed with factional aggression against the SACP, let us > focus on a militant programme of action that unites all our youth formations > premised on the challenges of unemployment, and especially the crisis levels > of youth unemployment in our society. > > Finally, the youth-wing of the SACP, the YCLSA, remains committed to and is > involved in practical programmes that raises the profile of the struggle that > young people face. The YCLSA has overtime managed to ensure that some of > these struggles are addressed in the immediate or long-term policy > interventions are put in place to address them. > > This year, for instance, the ANC-led government has prioritized jobs creation > as central to its programme, targeting in particular youth unemployment. It > is the YCLSA that invited more than 80 youth formations last year to discuss > and make proposals on both the ideological, structural and socio-economic > issues that causes unemployment. The Summit's resolutions characterized this > as the crises of capitalism and the neo-liberal paradigm as adopted in the > 1996 macro-economic policies. > > The unity of these youth movement under the banner of the YCLSA has never > been seen lately, and we never had to threaten people that we will ‘kick them > out of office' or labeled them as this or that if they do not prioritise job > creation. We opted to engage in what any ‘revolutionary youth formation' does > before making empty violent or electoral threats - we engaged into a militant > but yet qualitative debate and persuasion, and thus, we made progress. > > Our popular demand for free education > > There are many other things - including our popular demand for free > education, now becoming a reality (when the then leadership of the ANC YL had > dismissed this demand of the YCLSA as an unrealizable, communist pipedream); > provision of free sanitary towels; the closure of shebeens next to schools > and many others which we managed, the creation of a state bank, we are > beginning to see movement in this regard. We can label these as reforms, but > so is nationalization of mines, which are qualitative demands of a revolution > in the making. And this revolution is through influence, and as Cde Floyd > argued elsewhere (heaven knows where), "autonomy is elementary to the > successes and extent of influence a youth movement can impact in a > revolution" > > For Cde Floyd to suggest that the YCLSA is "nowhere near being revolutionary, > because it is not ideologically and politically autonomous" and to not > further substantiate this justifies no further response except this. The > YCLSA is a Marxist-Leninist formation of young people and it is the youth > wing of the SACP that established it. Its conduct and perspectives are drawn > out of a concrete analysis of concrete conditions. In this, both society and > history are not static but require appropriate adjustments in accordance with > constantly occurring change in the interest, not just of the youth, but > "importantly of the working class. > > We can only assume that for the YCLSA to justify being ideologically > steadfast, consistent and fearless" in the eyes of the self-imposed > revolutionaries means it has to shout empty slogans in the ears of the > leadership of the SACP in order to catch the eager ears of newspaper > sub-editors or to be seen to be involved in a sound-bite contest with the > leadership of the SACP. > > This is not the mettle of a revolutionary. Only true action - and not > revolutionary sounding phrases not backed by results but by insults. That is > not being "fearless or militant" it is merely seeking fame. We are not angels > or saints, but so are most of the revolutionaries. > > Buti Manamela is National Secretary of the Young Communist League of South > Africa > > > From: http://www.anc.org.za/docs/anctoday/2011/at08.htm#art2 > > > > -- > 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] . -- 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] .
