Читать книгу When Zuma Goes - Ralph Mathekga - Страница 5

The good analyst does not take sides; it is not his duty to judge, for he is obliged to explain and provide a wider perspective. In order to explain developments and the actors who are at the forefront of developments, all of the actors should be accorded the same level of respect. Some actors may seem too shallow and lacking in sophistication to merit focused analysis. But it is the duty of an analyst to explain how these actors fit into the greater scheme of things.

History teaches us that people who have a major impact on the world are sometimes initially dismissed as lacking in sophistication and/or clear goals. But once that person finds himself in the middle of destruction, or in the driver’s seat of a massive campaign to change the world, the spotlight falls on them while people wonder how that person managed to get into such a position of power. That is when the pundits try to make sense of that political actor’s story, and try to understand why he was ignored in the first place. Years ago, Jacob Zuma was dismissed by many as a pariah, a man with no formal education and therefore incapable of committing to anything that could have an impact on society. Yet he will go down in history as one of the most controversial presidents in South African history, a man whose methods have been misunderstood and often oversimplified.

In this book, I aim to avoid simplifying Zuma. I want to understand the logic of his methods, and how that logic is reflected in his party, the African National Congress (ANC), and in society in general. There is a sense that the ANC would prefer to move away from the Zuma years, to write off its losses, and to completely extricate itself from the man. But this will not explain how the party produced Zuma, and what his impact has been on the party. If indeed the ANC were allowed to conveniently turn the page on Zuma, the nation would be left to ask whether another Zuma might eventually emerge within the ANC. It is only through a searching analysis of how Zuma emerged within the ANC in particular, and in South Africa in general, that we can come to a full understanding of what might lie ahead.

Perhaps Zuma is not an outlier; perhaps he is a necessary stage in the development of our country. He represents a particular stage in the development of the system. In order to understand what he represents, he should be looked at in comparison, and it has to be a fair comparison. There should be no judgment in carrying out this analysis. Whether one is right or wrong, in trying to understand what will happen when Zuma goes, it is important to start from the point of view that he is a product of South African society. One way or another, South Africa has to account for how Zuma emerged from within the ANC, and from within our society. This exercise is a necessary step in attempting to understand what will happen when Zuma goes. The problem might not be Zuma himself; the problem might be the common sense of the nation that trusted him to lead. The question is: can this nation be trusted not to repeat the same mistake?