SO THE FIRST CITIZEN OF SOUTH AFRICA DOES NOT BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY AFTER ALL. From where Pres. Zuma is standing, the ills facing the South African people can only be corrected through the instrument of abominable dictatorship. Through his political lens, the democracy his organisation helped achieve, with his own contribution, falls deplorably short.

 

As he got the ball rolling regarding his party's campaign trail this past June, Zuma articulated that the Kliptown perspective (The Freedom Charter) seems to have failed to live up to the expectations of liberation activism. The perspective, we all are aware, elevates "the government of the people, by the same people, [for themselves]" above any other on the landscape of being politically up and about. 

 

It appears the African National Congress, via Zuma its chief mouthpiece, is being consumed by an hectic desire to retrogress. Speaking to troubled mothers, eager young people, and the elderly in Soweto, the president opined that if it all depended on his monopoly of wisdom, there would be zero social discomfort resulting from criminal ill-discipline. In isiZulu, he went on to tell his audience about his newly found inspirations for the "rainbow nation":  

 

"If I were a dictator, I would force all members of the population in our jails today to acquire a diploma or a degree from an institution of higher education. This condition I would impose as the passport to legal amnesty. Inmates would comply and walk free, otherwise perpetuate their state of incarceration. Well, I am not a dictator. So they are all off the hook."  

Effectively, democracy is bad for the rest of us. With a 20/20 hindsight, we were mistaken to think that it would unchain us. And all of us are to blame. Because everyone chipped in to the struggle, across all demographics, well, a second round of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is in order. We all need to account for our aspirations from the past. And TRC II should absolve us all. 

If indeed Zuma deems democracy to be inadequate, it comes as no surprise. After all, he is not a veritable democrat: his circle of  friends is untouchable; his waving of the official wand is Apartheid-like; and criminal charges never seem to stick on his slick personality. All this proves right Plato's theory that human power and goodness are mutually exclusive endowments. If he thinks that the South African people are keen on the past setting and feeling an intense sense nostalgia, he is wrong. I mean, the electorate needs to balk at that sicking suggestion. CUT! Says a producer on set if she feels things are getting out of control.

In his critically acclaimed book THE OPEN SOCIETY AND ITS ENEMIES, Karl Popper treats this historical phenomenon of opposition against civilization. He cites Plato as one of the enemies of this "open society". On that consideration, Plato and Zuma, and all others, occupy various planks on the same platform.

Popper wrote: "it is high time for us to learn that the question ‘who is to wield the power in the state?’ matters only little as compared with the question ‘how is the power wielded?’ and ‘how much power is wielded?’ We must learn that in the long run, all political problems are institutional problems, problems of the legal framework rather than of persons, and that progress towards more equality can be safeguarded only by the institutional control of power."

So not only is Zuma off the mark about the power principle, he is also mistaken on the context within which that power subsists. Plato slated a democracy for having persecuted his mentor, Socrates. In our own era, and in his first term in office, Zuma is slamming the democratic paradigm for not being enough of a corrective dynamic in comparison to the problems which plague it.  

Another aspect about the Zuma character which warrants a mention is the fact that what he expresses in isiZulu, he never repeats in the English language.

So the populist ideologues are continuing to play with the emotional apostasy prevalent across the country. We have lost the art of substantial engagement. We have upped and gone "awol" from our national life. And we have abandoned our civic duty on feeding healthy and nutritious fodder to the national debate. Little wonder our body politic is starving to death.