For anyone who enjoys talking about politics, it is inevitable that one ends up discussing, debating or arguing matters of varying scope – from matters of global politics to matters of critical national importance (the economy, perhaps, considering the current recession), to local matters that affect only a single neighborhood. Perhaps even just a theoretical issue, something that has little or no significance to the world as it is. One common question is whether it makes sense to argue the little things – the matters of little importance or small scope. Should one not focus on the bigger issues at hand?
As an example, I’ll refer to the recent matter of Helen Zille. An article by Max du Preez titled “Dear Helen, please call it off” caught my eye.
To provide a summary: Max refers to his history with Helen; points out that her critics who race to claim racism on her part do so without evidence; says he will not address the merits of her Tweets about the colonial legacy – and then addresses and judges that very incident from his point of view; accuses her of crippling the Democratic Alliance (DA) by her actions; asks her to step back from the matter, retiring from the DA, in the interest of the DA’s public image, and hers. Her current fight, Max claims, is a matter of ego and stubbornness. She should just let it go, he claims, and retire for the good of the DA, since the DA has a good chance of taking over from the ailing African National Congress (ANC) in 2019. Why argue this “little matter”, when there are more important matters to consider?
There is much to be said for focusing on the big picture. Losing sight of what truly matters is ever a great risk – just look at how quarreling over the details has split the Christian faith into an ever-growing multitude of separate denominations, and how the Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims have waged war against each other, despite having so much in common. In the end, does it matter whether you want to eat your boiled egg with the big end up or the little end? Is the color of the car not much less important than whether it has enough seats for your family?
However, there is a terrible risk in just letting the little things go. How did we end up with Zuma, after all? The ANC, you see, let the little things go. What’s the real harm in appointing a pal or a cousin to a nice government post, right? What’s the problem with a struggle stalwart pocketing a little extra on a government deal – they fought for the new South Africa, so a little extra for them only makes sense? Why would it be so bad to make sure your son gets a government job? Somebody has to do it, after all, and you are sure your boy will give it his best effort.
Little things eventually became the norm. Nobody objected too much – these are the saviors of our democracy of whom we heard in schools, in the media, from the government, and they can surely be trusted. Once the little things no longer raised an eyebrow, bigger things started slipping through. It’s so easy to just nudge the tender process a little, make sure your cousin gets that big supply deal for stationary at the provincial offices of your department. It’s going to a comrade – a black comrade, even better – so it’s really just Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) in action. The ANC will rule forever, anyway, so it’s not like any of your comrades are going to object too firmly, particularly when you know all their own little schemes. Nobody rocks the boat, nobody wants to stand out and risk losing the good thing they have going.
Then Zuma came along – by all accounts a much craftier man than his public appearances suggest, being the former head of intelligence for the ANC, a chess player since his first stint in prison, and a veteran of advanced Soviet training during his years with uMkhonto weSizwe (MK), the military arm of the ANC. Despite being embroiled in a massive scandal – the same one that landed his advisor and friend, Schabir Sheik, in jail and hangs over Zuma himself in the form of over 700 charges of corruption – Zuma executed a neat manoeuvre that swayed a large faction inside the ANC to his cause. Despite these 700 charges, rape charges, controversial quotes and the like, Zuma was elected President of our nation.
The “little things” soon became much bigger things. Shady deals crept into the everyday functioning of State-Owned Entities (SOEs), South African taxpayers started paying multiple millions to support Zuma’s large and growing family. When Zuma didn’t bother to announce his financial interests, the ANC casually brushed it off as just being difficult for him to do with such a large family. The ANC would never have considered making waves about it – it was strictly “the little things,” and they were far more preoccupied with the gradual rise of the DA, and things like that.
It was only when the “little things” became national crises and massively embarrassing scandals that the ANC, and in fact the broader public of our nation, started taking an interest. As the last year or two has shown, that interest was far, far too late. Zuma failed in his most important duty – upholding, protecting and serving the Constitution – and yet the ANC would and could do nothing. After all, what could the National Executive Committee (NEC) do? There was still the bigger picture that they were not willing to risk: the ANC’s votes. When it became clear that Zuma’s survival put that big picture at risk, the NEC still dared not act. As our supposed leader of the nation recently pointed out, a large chunk of the NEC is employed in comfortable, profitable jobs at his absolute discretion. The little things that they let go came back to hold them hostage.
Back to the Zille example – why would I argue the little matter of the merit of her tweets? I argue it, because if I let the armchair warriors bury her and say nothing, what sort of precedent does it set for the time when I speak an unpopular, but factually correct opinion? Shutting up about it, or joining the dogpile of opportunity, wouldn’t sink South Africa, and might do some good by propping up the public image of the DA, but at what cost? For one, if Zille just gives up, South Africa will lose a politician that has done much to push us toward a true democracy instead of a one-party banana republic. Secondly, I’d be helping to shut the door on what she later clarified to be her goal with the Tweets: a robust, logical discussion of how to use the legacy of colonialism to push us forward, like Singapore has managed. Sure, the Tweets were probably poorly thought out considering the political climate in South Africa. Far too easy to interpret as a support of colonialism, but I argue it nonetheless since the debate she was aiming for might just help save our ailing economy.
The second part of the Zille example is why I would argue the matter of her recent suspension. Many have lauded the suspension as a good move, only to turn around and complain about Zille still being the premier of the Western Cape. Notably, by the DA’s own constitution, Maimane was in the wrong when he announced Zille’s suspension without following due procedure. A little matter, right? The DA top brass eventually suspended her anyway, after following the due procedure that Maimane skipped straight over on his own initiative. No harm was done, right?
Disrespecting the Constitution of South Africa – that is a large part of what drove tens of hundreds of South Africans to take the time to protest against Zuma, many of those people having to take time off from their jobs to attend the protests. It may be a much smaller matter, how Maimane stepped outside the constitution of his party for the sake of popular acclaim in the Zille matter, but does that make it okay? Should we just take it on faith that Maimane will act differently, should he be placed in Zuma’s shoes in 2019?
I argue the little things because life is made up of lots of little things. The big things are important, sure, but is Zuma not enough proof that a big speech and an oath of office are nothing when not backed up by doing the little things right? We all need to ask ourselves where we draw the line of “little things”, because our negligence with Zuma has put us in a recession, and I can guarantee you that we are headed to a future where more than just a third of our citizens are denied jobs and reduced to begging for relief from the hunger and the cold.
Each Rand lost to the Zupta machine, every small crime a politician gets away with – the bill comes due. Can we afford it?
Opinion Piece by Lelouch Giard
South Africa Today – South Africa News
Visit A Vigilant Voice for more articles by Lelouch Giard
