I fully realise that by writing this article I wander into dangerous territory, and open myself up to being called all sorts of nasty names. I also realise I would need several degrees in Law, Sociology and Anthropology to write authoritatively on this topic. However, the Internet is no place for informed opinions, so let me begin.
Figure 1: Future President Julius Malema
Everyone living in South Africa, and quite a few besides, has a strong opinion on this guy. My knee-jerk reaction is to pity and fear him for the overstuffed, rabid dog he could quite possibly be. However, I have also heard Gareth Cliff claim that he went to see him speak, and he said that the guy actually came across as politically-savvy, forward thinking and well-informed.
Now, I usually take what The Cliff says with a pinch of salt. However, he was formerly one of the Nation’s biggest Malema-bashers, so I am now prepared to hold my judgment until I have met the guy and heard him speak in person.
Again however, his character is not under my scrutiny. I am referring to the article published by IOL on 02 November, 2009 in which it was alleged that Malema was pulled over for speeding, and then began to swing political dong to get out of it. He allegedly (and I’m being very careful to use that word a lot) yelled ‘Are you not aware that I am Julius, the president of the Youth League?‘ and then proceeded to call the MEC of transport to get him to come down and ‘discipline’ the unruly police officers who had pulled him over.
Since then a slew of articles have come out about it, in yet another Malema press frenzy. He does something like this every week, guys, and every time, the same thing happens. White people get angry, some black people get angry at the white people, and they all piss and moan on the comment threads for a few days. He doesn’t actually get into trouble.
We don’t like to admit it, but we know why. Incredibly enough, I have yet to get to my point. It’s not just that this kind of thing happens all the time in this country, and in the rest of Africa. My point revolves around the reaction to, and acceptance of, this kind of ‘above-the-law’ behaviour. For the rest of this article I’ll mostly drop the humour, and cite heavily from Dr George B. Aytitty’s article ‘The Concept of Wealth in Traditional Africa‘, and sources he mentions.
Most people can’t understand it when someone posts a comment like this on the IOL article mentioned above:
“There is nothing wrong with what Malema has done, he is a high ranking member of the ANC and the future president – he is therefore above the law (sic).”
This kind of thing frightens white people, and makes us want to move to New Zealand. We are tempted to dismiss the speaker as ignorant, stupid and brain-washed by ANC propaganda. And we might be right.
But according to the good Dr. Aytitty, wealth in traditional Africa was a virtue – but only if it was earned with hot sweat. In Western society this was more or less the case as well – both societies had some ideal of a meritocracy (being awesome is rewarded) in the foundation of their modern (post-feudal) structure. Though this is of course perverted in the West, most people still pretend it is true, and things function properly. If someone abuses status or power, people get upset, and they get slapped on the wrist, just like a real meritocracy.
In Africa, it seems, this is not the way our ideal of a meritocracy got bent. According to CNN, merit leads to money, political power and status. In South Africa of late, it seems to be that status confers merit. Simply by being in a position of political power makes you worthy of that position in the public eye. I am generalizing horribly, and I know that a lot of people in government fully deserve to be there, and have worked hard for their posts. For example, I wasn’t too bummed when Trevor Manuel bought himself some shiny new wheels – I figure he’s earned it by now.
Figure 2: Trevor’s New Beamer
All that aside, I’d like to ask how this happened to Africa. As the good Doctor’s article says of traditional Africa: “Wealth in indigenous Africa had a physical presence… [but] Royalty was in name and not in fact, as the Igbo recognized achievement rather than hereditary-bestowed greatness (Olaniyan, 1985:24)”. What this means was that wealth and power often happened together in African society, and the overt display of this wealth is highly valued, especially by those that do not possess it. To really hammer the point:
“The pursuit of wealth was a cultural occupation! Prestige, status, honor and influence were all attached to wealth in indigenous systems. The wealthy were “important people” with influence in governmental affairs. It was no accident that political figures in traditional African societies were also wealthy.” (LeVine, 1962).
In short, a rich chief enriches the tribe. Having powerful, charismatic and influential leaders who are above reproach made a traditional society stronger, happier and more cohesive. These values are not very different from the West, but the idea of the goodness inherent in a just distribution of wealth does not apply across the board in Africa – only to those who work for a living.
What this means (to me) is that African society might be more predisposed to accepting the transgressions of its leaders, because it sits well that they should have these privileges. The people value their leader’s wealth. For the Gikuyu (Please bear with me and forgive the inevitable cow example):
“Cows give the owner a prestige in the community…The owner of a large number of cattle was sentimentally satisfied by praise names conferred upon him by the community in their songs and dances” (Kenyatta, 1938:62)
Figure 3: Songs and Dances
During the run-up to the election, I spoke to two fervent ANC supporters, both of whom were low-income earners, and neither of whom finished high school. Still, I considered these people to be level-headed, intelligent individuals. When I asked why they were voting for Zuma, they both responded the same way. They said they weren’t voting for Zuma, so much as they were voting for Mandela’s party.
What does this mean? It means that the ANC is good at making voters out of people who don’t have the time or energy to find out better for themselves. Both of these people worked hard to support families, and didn’t read political blogs in their spare time. They got their news from friends or the SABC, and their political education from rallies and fliers, so it’s hard to blame them for not considering all the alternatives. If the ANC tells them to support Julius Malema, then that’s what they’ll do. They might share Gareth Cliff’s opinion of him, or they might not, but their opinions didn’t factor into it. What’s important is that Mandela’s party put him there, and so he must deserve to be there. In the old days they used to call it the ‘Divine Right of Kings’, now in African Democracy flavour.
I’m not here to talk about what this means, or whether any of it is even remotely accurate. I know I’m missing a link between traditional African conceptions of wealth, and the seemingly widespread acceptance of government corruption, arrogance and overspending as somehow ‘right’. Because make no mistake: a moral weight has been attached.
Maybe someone can help me fill that in. I welcome your comments.
Your Host
Norman Conquest
References Cited:
Aytittey, George B. (2008) ‘The Concept of Wealth in Traditional Africa‘. published online at The Cheetah Index.
Kenyatta, Jomo. (1938) ‘Facing Mount Kenya‘. London: Secker and Warburg
LeVine, R.A. (1962) ‘Wealth and Power in Gusiiland‘ in Bohannan and Dalton, eds.
And some anonymous coward on IOL.
Related posts:
Malema wil grow up one day. He wil learn 2 thnk b4 he acts. Malema i aint got anythin against him. Big up dawg. Big up.