The “Patriotic Bourgeoisie” is pure exaggeration of the
accomplishments by the motive force!

In setting a tone for this input we underscore a concurrence to the
assertion made by Alvin Toffler’s that, the illiterate of the 21st
century won’t be people who cannot read or write but will be people
who would not be able to learn, unlearn and relearn. Certainly Mr.
Toffler has a point in his assertion because people and organizations
will have to unlearn some of the old ways and relearn sophisticated
and new ways of doing things in order to preserve integrity and
relevance at the eyes of those they lead and serve.  Language is such
one element that constitutes an invaluable tool to communicate
messages and ought to be used diligently by organizations in their
policy documents.
In this input we intend to criticize and submit a view in relation to
what we regard as an error in language usage to be found in the
discussion document of the ANC entitled: The second transition.
Despite clear coherence in content and logical flow of arguments
correctly describing the current phase of revolution, its enemies, and
its motive forces as well as their immediate tasks; we are submitting
that the usage of the word “Patriotic Bourgeoisie” to describe
progressive or rather black business is an error in language usage and
may be subjected to great distortion either wittingly or unwittingly
and thus dissuade working people who constitute the main body of our
revolution from our organization’s noble agenda.
Let us at the outset clarify why we think that patriotic bourgeoisie
constitute one major error in language usage and must be accordingly
reviewed, by carefully defining the terms in order to get our language
correct. It is our view that the bourgeoisie is a class with two
varying sections within it; the first section is constituted by the
bourgeoisie of comprador character or simply put, the big bourgeoisie
and the second section is constituted by the national bourgeoisie. On
one hand the bourgeoisie of comprador character represents a class of
a pro-imperialist section within the bourgeoisie that operates as an
intermediary of foreign monopoly capital and is a principal social
mainstay of neocolonialism. On the other hand the national bourgeoisie
is local class of entrepreneurs/businessmen in an economically less
developed, subjugated or newly liberated countries who are interested
in their country’s independent political and economic development.
The ANC correctly outlines what the immediate tasks of the “Patriotic
Bourgeoisie” are, and also acknowledges the snail pace towards the
achievement of such tasks by this force. Amongst its tasks, the
“Patriotic Bourgeoisie” must facilitate industrialization and
development of national productive forces, must contribute towards
research, innovation and skill development, it must also play a role
in regional integration. The ANC acknowledges that this motive has
not, despite having attained a democratic country and deracialisation
of the economy; resolutely undertaken its task for industrialization
and development of national productive forces by any significant
counts. Instated the wealth of this section is defined by shareholding
in various big corporates, which are subjects of foreign monopoly
capital administered on its behalf by the bourgeoisie of comprador
character. The facts to this end are correctly illuminated in
percentage of black owned companies listed in the Johannesburg stocks
exchange.

Having conceded to the limitations as above the ANC must, whilst
continuing to mobilize and uniting the ‘Patriotic Bourgeoisie”, ensure
that it correctly spell the status of this force in the current phase
of revolution. It is our view that the ‘Patriotic Bourgeoisie’ is
neither the enemy nor constituting the main body of our revolution but
remains a weaker section of it and can thus not be in the position to
determine its direction or conclusion. The ‘Patriotic Bourgeoisie’ is
equally fettered and persecuted by imperialism and bureaucrat –
capitalism though to varying extents as the working class which is a
rightful determining force of the character and direction of our
revolution.
In putting some essence into this, the ANC should remember that much
as the ‘Patriotic Bourgeoisies’ profits to various extents from
general democratic reforms, yet its typical conciliatory tendencies
prevents it from implementing them consistently. Though it has some
great interest in economic reforms to create local market the
‘Patriotic Bourgeoisie’ does not resolutely eradicate feudalistic
institutions of serfdom and working class exploitation for it is
afraid to establishing precedent that may jeopardize its future
earnings through dividend payouts! It is evident that this section may
at anytime capitulate and jump onto the bandwagon of the bourgeoisie
of comprador character. The dual social nature of the ‘Patriotic
Bourgeoisie’ becomes especially evident once national independence has
been won, on one hand it is oppressed by the imperialist monopolies on
the on the other, it itself exploits the working people.
We have thus far explained what is implied by the ‘Patriotic
Bourgeoisie’ which according to us befits a meaning and description of
a national bourgeoisie. We now in turn briefly define the bourgeoisie
of comprador character or rather the big bourgeoisie. This is a
section of the bourgeoisie which as indicated in definitions above,
assumes an intermediary role of foreign monopoly capital and is well
remunerated for such a managerial responsibility. Not only does it
have its greed fed by the foreign monopoly, it too server and owe
strong allegiance to imperialist country and countless ties connect it
closely with feudal and exploitative force in the country side.
Inevitably the big bourgeoisie will itself be highly divided owing to
allegiances to different imperialist powers.
In clarifying this Mao Tse-Tung stated that once the contradictions
amongst imperialist powers grow into sharp antagonism, and only this
powers becomes particular object of the revolution, the section in the
big bourgeoisie owing allegiance to the other imperialist groups may
join the current anti-imperialist front to a certain extent and for a
particular period of time. The big bourgeoisie is the most vacillating
and politically weak section which in a revolutionary discourse will
at most instances be left with three options, first to turn into
collaborator to the imperialist power depending on allegiance thereto,
second it is apt to join the anti-imperialist camp and third it may
elect to become indifferent and yet remain vacillating trying out
various option to safeguard its wealth.



 What is an alternative word to this unsettling ‘Patriotic Bourgeoisie’?

In setting the tone to this input, we deliberately omitted to give our
own version regarding what truly unsettles our thought in the
construction of terminology or naming of this motive force. One might
be wondering what we are on about, because the words national
bourgeoisie and patriotic bourgeoisie seem to imply one and the same
thing and thus should not necessitate any criticism let alone an
appeal for review as such words could easily be used interchangeably?
In our view it is grossly inappropriate to degenerate this input into
some semantics agitation that could easily be solved.  Purely stated
being patriotic means being devoted and such is measured by will and
zeal to serve the course to which one is devoted.
We find that the ANC has moved with speed to accord ‘Patriotic
Bourgeoisies’  a convenient honor to bear the word ‘patriotic’ in that
it does not commensurate the efforts waged by this motive force since
the democratization as  well as the deracialisation of the country’s
economy !  In a country with a gini coefficient of around 0.60
according to the Centre Intelligence Agency; which thus make it one
most unequal society, it can never be appropriate to accord a
prestigious honor equivalent to patriotism to a motive forces that
prioritized shareholding over a prime task of fostering
industrialization and development of national productive forces.
The ANC pre 1994 has undertaken a clear lens view to characterize the
phase of revolution at that time; it correctly defined the motive
force and the enemy of the revolution. In relation to the enemy of
revolution the ANC characterized it as below.

“The liberation movement defined the enemy, on the other hand, as the
system of white minority domination with the white community being the
beneficiaries and defenders of this system. These in turn were made up
of workers, middle strata and capitalists. Monopoly capital was
identified as the chief enemy of the NDR. It was also emphasised that
apartheid was not in the long-term interest of the white community.”

In the document under review ( Second transition), the ANC ask a
question in relation to the above phrase whether the enemy could still
be characterized as such in the current transition? In no uncertain
terms the answer is a resound yes! This we say because the wrath of
the socio- economic legacy of apartheid and colonialism is felt now
just like ever and that monopoly capital is still holding the economic
forces intact to benefit the minority and therefore remains the enemy
of our revolution.

According to the task of NDR and mobilization of motive forces
document of the ANC (2000: Section F), since the early 90’s and
accelerating after 1994, the growth of small and expanding black
business and capitalist class through some unbundling initiative by
white business, through the democratic state’s policies and programmes
such as affirmative procurement, licensing agreements, deregulation,
restructuring of state assets and through the emergence of union
investment companies. In the aforesaid phrase the ANC was describing
the motive force it had then called “The Black Business/Capitalist”.
It is now about twelve years since the aforesaid observation on the
emergence of the black business was made and little has been
accomplished by this motive force to fulfill its strategic task, yet
it is rewarded with a prestigious prefix of being patriotic and is
according called “The Patriotic Bourgeoisie”?

It is our view that the ANC must change the term “Patriotic
Bourgeoisie” in its current second transition document to the Black
Business/ Capitalist or clearly the National Bourgeoisie. This motive
force remains relevant in the current phase of our revolution and
ought to be united and mobilize. It is never prudent to exaggerate the
accomplishments of this motive force by according it rosy and cheerful
prefixes when there is no material justification to qualify such. This
is our view in making sure that the meaning derived from the documents
of the movement escape the possibility of being maneuvered by those
with untoward intents based on language technicalities!

Amandla

List of References
1.      Mao Tse- Tung (1948). Selected works of Mao-Tse- Tung
2.      National Bourgeoisie. Available on the dictionary for scientific
socialism. From
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Scientific+Communism (
Accessed 21 May 2012)
3.      ANC Policy Discussion Document Version 7: Second Transition. (2012)
4.      ANC National General Council Document : Tasks of the NDR and
mobilization of motive forces     .(2000)

-- 
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