Let’s talk about these things…

Given at Johannesburg Central BGM, 9 May 2010

Let’s talk about these things… ‘No Woman, No Revolution’

I greet you all my comrades

And protocol observed

Comrades I have been tasked by the BEC to lead the discussion of No woman, No Revolution, and I am doing it on the day when all of us are conscious that today 09, 2010 May, it’s a Mother’s day celebration.

My task is not to tell you my comrades how one should think but make it possible for us all to debate this issue before us today.  Therefore with this introduction, it will only serve to keep the pot boiling as we debate:

Talk about these things (Asikhulume)…..”No woman, No Revolution”

As the revolutionary Communist the question that need to be honestly answered without one being biased is that, how Communist should celebrate women’s day?... should as Communist locate women’s day  within a class contest contradictions or we should look at it within NDR and the 50/50% gender parity that the leader of the alliance ANC has implemented? Can us today as we go forward be in a position to say that 50/50 policy gender parity is working or at least, it is taking us a step forward, because a little movement forward is always better than no movement at all.

As a free student of the Communist and society I see this (women’s question) as a class struggle that is deepening and sharpening the contradiction on progression on women and the struggle confronting women in this epoch.

The women’s subject is very challenging as it challenges holistic view and understanding of women struggle as the women’s world is divided, just as is the world of men, into two camps; the interests and aspirations of one group of women bring it close to the bourgeois class, while the other group has close connections with the proletariat, and its claims for liberation encompass a full solution to the woman question (see The Social basis of the Woman Question, Alexandra Kollontai, 1909).

It is therefore paramount to have active women and we should  protect our women with all what we have as we want woman workers to achieve equality with men not only in law, but in life as well…therefore, elect more women workers, both Communist and non-Party, to the Soviet.  If she is only an honest woman worker who is capable of managing work sensibly and conscientiously, it makes no difference if she is not a member of the Party, elect her to…Soviets (see To the Working Women, V I Lenin, 1920. I expect that as we come to grips with a women question both women and men will realise that proletarian women have a different attitude. They do not see men as the enemy and the oppressor; on the contrary, they think of men as their comrades, who shares with them the drudgery of the daily round and fight with them for a better future. The women and her male comrade are enslaved by the same social conditions; the same hated chains of capitalism oppress their will and deprive them of the joys and charms of life (see The Social basis of the Woman Question, Alexandra Kollontai, 1909).

It is therefore important that we must not loose sight of the bigger struggle before us (of No woman, No Revolution) and be diverted to discuss politics of individuals of which as Communists we are lucky that we comprehend things based on concrete analysis for concrete situations, as in words, bourgeois democracy promises equality and liberty. In fact, not a single bourgeois republic, not even the most advanced once, has given the feminine half of the human race either full legal equality with men or freedom from the guardianship and oppression of men.[i] Therefore the Women and Child Ministry which we have at this period will never deliver socialism or set free women; it is us, with organs of popular power (Soviets) that we must show commitment.

As a free society grappling with equality of women as we understand that ‘a free development of each is a condition for a free development of all’, and here we are not, of course, speaking of making women the equal of men as far as productivity of labour, the quantity of labour, the length of the working day, labour conditions, etc.., are concerned; we mean that the woman should not, unlike the man, be oppressed because of her position in the family. You all know that even when women have full rights, they still remain factually downtrodden because all housework is left to them. In most cases housework is the most unproductive, the most barbarous and the most arduous work a woman can do. It is exceptionally petty and does not include anything that would in any way promote the development of the woman (The Tasks of the working women’s movement in the Soviet Republic, V I Lenin, 1919. Now as a free society, is it our task to revive the women’s body to fight their struggle as they see fit with all contradictions or get another body all together of the working women to advance the struggle?

In a free society and that of the mind can we impose on women as to how should they organise themselves, as free willing if they are not ready or conscious of the looming challenges before them of equality first? As the task of communists is to educate, organize and mobilize. Are we doing enough?

As the 3^rd Congress of the Communist international seems to think, can we prescribe what women organization should do or should not do? The III Congress of the Communist International therefore recognizes that a special apparatus for conduction work among women is necessary. This apparatus must consist of departments or commissions for among women, attached to every party committee at all levels, from the CC of the Party right down to the urban, district or local party committee. This decision is binding to on all Parties in the Communist International (see Method and forms of work among Communist party women, Third Congress of the Communist International, 1921). The contradictions intensify as the FEDSAW Founding conference, 1954 said that a Single Society: we women do not form a society separate from the men. There is only one society, and it is made up of both women and men. As women we share the problems and anxiety of our men, and join hands with them to remove social evils and obstacles to progress (see Soviet Power and the Status of Women, V I Lenin, 1919). And we hope as we continue to agree to disagree how our relationship with women should be on this revolutionary path and that of getting Socialism in our life time and ultimately Communism as the last stage on this transitionary milieu.

“An Appeal: We women appeal to all progressive organizations, to members of the great National Liberatory movements to the trade unions and working class organizations, to the churches, educational and welfare organizations, to all progressive men and women who have interests of the people at heart, to join with us in this great and noble endeavour.” [Women’s Charter, adopted at the Founding Conference of the Federation of South African Women (FEDSAW) JHB, 17 April 1954]

The proletariat cannot achieve complete freedom, unless it achieves complete freedom for women [To the working women, VI Lenin, 1920]

Socialism is the best

Co-Chair Communist University, JHB

Deputy Chair, SACP, JHB Central Branch

Cde Sibusiso Mchunu

(BGM Presentation 09, 2010 May)

  

Click here to download any of the texts mentioned above

Xenophobia, an attack on the NDR

CU, NDR, Extra

Second Anniversary of the start of the “xenophobia” pogroms in Alexandra Township

11 May 2010

The CoRMSA report called May 2008 Violence Against Foreign Nationals in South Africa (1.8 MB PDF, cover illustration above) is out today, exactly two years after the event in Alexandra Township that was copied in many parts of South Africa in the weeks that followed, during which scores of lives were lost and thousands of people were dispossessed and displaced.

This document is highly relevant to any assessment of the nature and purpose of South Africa’s National Democratic Revolution. The document is a mixture. It is not free of the kind of objective idealism (post-modernism) that attributes human actions to conditions of original sin as opposed to political agency. Yet it also contains quite clear statements that point towards the shortfall in organisation of the population on National Democratic Revolutionary lines.

For example, the following shocking passages refer to the very first incidents, and they confirm that these incidents were politically organised:

Perpetrators

Respondents report that a large number of residents, men and women, participated in the attacks. The majority were hostel dwellers, according to some respondents. Some in the area were reportedly coerced to join but the majority said that they participated voluntarily. There is a general agreement that the attacks were planned and led by Zulu-speakers from the hostels (Nobuhle and Madala) under the leadership of Indunas and the CPF Sub-Forum. Asked whether local leaders were involved, the Alex FM radio news editor responded:

“They were involved, even if they can’t come out and admit it openly; they were not surprised, they were happy; when I called them, they did not want to come on air to address people. They were also saying: ‘they [foreigners] should go’. […]There were secret meetings at Madala Hostel. It’s a dangerous place, people have guns; the police are also scared to go there. Meetings are still going on at night.” (Interview the News Editor of Alex FM. Alex, 2 September 2008)

An official of the Alexandra SAPS Victims Support Unit also reports that planning meetings were organised by local leaders. She said:

“Meetings were held that side… from 1st to 8th Street. It’s probably in those meetings where attacks were organised; but in the end the whole town bought in.” (Interview with an official of the Alex SAPS Victims Support Unit. Alex, 3 September 2008.)

The local leaders’ role was not only limited to the planning of the violence; they led and were actively involved in carrying out the attacks. The members of the men’s focus group were surprised when asked what leaders did to stop the violence. One of them said: “No, you are missing the point. Leaders were with us at all times. They directed us on where to go and when.” Another member of the focus group who participated in the attacks testified further: “Every time they entered the site, they wanted South Africans to join. Even myself I joined but I was at the back. I was not carrying sticks and spears as the leaders in front.” (Men’s focus group interview. Alex, 5 September 2008) Respondents revealed that women were also actively involved in the attacks, especially in pointing out where foreign nationals lived. A woman confirmed:

“What can I say? I would say they do not like them. Even women. Normally the first person during any violence is always a woman. This violence was no different, it was mothers who were leading and pointing out where foreigners lived.” (Interview with respondent A1D7. Alex Sector 2, 1 September 2008)

Later on in the 234-page report, which includes many studies of specific areas, the question of leadership is discussed very directly, as here for example:

Absence of institutionalised leadership

Where the violence occurred, there was an absence of institutionalised, legitimate and trusted leadership that could represent the full diversity of the residents. Such an absence led to the emergence of informal, self-appointed structures that almost completely appropriated the authority constitutionally mandated to local government structures, operating as an ‘untouchable’ parallel leadership. Examples of these include the ‘comrades’ in Itireleng, ‘izinduna’ in Sector 2 Alexandra, Gauteng Civic Association (GACA) in Atteridgeville, the Masiphumelele Development Forum (MDF) in Masiphumelele, and the ‘Advisory Centre’ in Du Noon. Even for those commonly known community leadership structures such as Street Committees, Block Committees, CPFs, SANCO, and so on307, the local government represented in theory by ward councils has no say in their membership, the nature of their mandate, or the character of their operational and disciplinary procedures.

As discussed in different case studies, community leadership is an attractive alternative for the largely unemployed residents of the informal settlements. It is a form of paid employment or an income-generating activity where supposedly voluntary leaders often charge for services, levy protection fees, and sell or let land and buildings, and take bribes in exchange for solving problems or influencing tender processes. The profitability of community leadership positions attracts considerable infighting and competition for power and legitimacy among different groups present in affected areas. Indeed, street committees, Community Policing Forums (CPFs) and South African National Civics Organisation (SANCO) members in most areas report involvement in solving all sorts of problems community members bring to them. In Madelakufa 2, for instance, respondents report that the CPF, whose mandate is – according to the local CPF leaders – ‘exclusively fighting crime’, also involves itself in solving socio-economic an service delivery issues. In Du Noon, the local SANCO, which the other local leaders call a ‘family business’ constantly battles the ward council when negotiating development projects with donors. In Atteridgeville, GACA, reported to be behind the violence, was, at the time of fieldwork, organising a parallel reintegration programme and was fighting with the local council for allocated government funds.

For local political players, organising attacks on and removing ‘unwanted’ foreign nationals from affected communities has proven one of the most successful strategies for earning their constituencies’ trust while gaining additional legitimacy, clients and revenues. As mentioned above, the xenophobic violence in most affected areas was organised by those parallel structures and/or by some self-serving members of formal institutions, who capitalised on residents’ feelings, fears and negative attitudes towards non-nationals. Their help in ‘resolving’ this bitterly felt problem served to demonstrate a superior efficacy in ‘crime’-fighting, compared to formal police, and greater empathy with residents concerns, compared with elected and municipal structures, thus consolidating their identity as the only ‘true’ leaders. By removing foreign nationals, local political and community leaders sought to appropriate local state authority for localised political and economic interests. While, to many outside observers, violence against foreign nationals in affected areas appeared to be a spontaneous community uprising, the study shows that it is in all observed cases engineered and fuelled by influential individuals and groups that have direct and self-centred interests to serve.

Elsewhere, examples are given of communities where xenophobic attacks did not occur in this period, even though there were documented attempts of incitement in such areas. As the report says: “the critical factor was the ability of leadership to represent and look out for the interests and safety of all residents. Unfortunately not all communities are lucky to have this kind of leadership.”

Luck or political action?

The CoRMSA report is clearly unable to recommend the kind of organisational initiatives that would result in “leadership [able] to represent and look out for the interests and safety of all residents.” That would be a job for the Communist Party.

Hence, the many recommendations that the report makes do appear rather marginal, palliative or contingent.

Whereas the proper lesson here is the continuation of the National Democratic Revolution in terms of democratic political organisation in all areas.

Context and Conclusion

CoRMSA now believes, following many hearsay reports that is has received from ordinary people, that there are “Real Threats of Mass Xenophobic Violence after World Cup”, and they have issued a statement to this effect which can be read here.

The May/June 2008 attacks took place in the charged post-Polokwane atmosphere when Thabo Mbeki was still President and the security forces were under the command of his allies – some of whom later defected to COPE. It was the time when more than one alliance leader felt obliged to announce that he would “die for Zuma” if necessary.

Clearly, the answer is not to “die for Zuma” but rather to organise for the National Democratic Revolution. In this sense the contest of Polokwane and the solution to “xenophobic violence” can be taken as one and the same struggle.

Those fascists and semi-fascists who want chaos and the defeat of the NDR in South Africa will take the opportunities that they find. The way to close off such opportunities is to do what the SACP Constitution prescribes: Educate, Organise, and Mobilise.

VC