[DEBATE] : (Fwd) Ngwane's CCS seminar

[Patrick Bond]

THE STRUGGLE AS SEEN FROM SOWETO
CCS Seminar 12-12-2007 Input by Trevor Ngwane

1.Introduction

Thank you for inviting me to speak in this seminer today. It is an 
honour and I appreciate the opportunity very much. Thanks to all the CCS 
staff and associates. Thanks to Comrade Patrick for his support and 
encouragement and patience. It is an honour to give this presentation in 
the presence of Comrade Dennis Brutus, unkonka wefusi, umakadebona 
[salutations to an elder].

The topic today is about what is happening on the ground in Soweto, 
therefore my talk will be more about sharing experiences rather than 
giving my opinions. This seminar should be a conversation rather than a 
lecture. Thank you for making time to attend and share ideas together.

2.It was a good year

As the year drew to a close I thought a bit about the struggle in 2007 
and how I felt about it. The feeling I heard was that 2007 had been a 
good year for the struggle in Soweto. This view is based on my personal 
experience working as an organizer for the Soweto Electricity Crisis 
Committee (SECC), an affiliate of the Anti-Privatisation Froum (APF). I 
am also a member of a small collective of socialists called the 
Socialist Group. I was also very involved in the affairs of the 
Operation Khanyisa Movement (OKM), an electoral front consisting of some 
APF affiliates that won one seat in the ANC-dominated Johannesburg City 
Council. My personal experience is limited, particular and quite 
localized. It is important to note that the SECC is a minority 
organization in Soweto hence this assessment does not claim to be 
representative nor valid beyond the SECC experience as interpreted by 
myself.

3.What is happening in Soweto?

Water case in court
The SECC and APF closed the year on a high note with the water case 
being argued in the Johannesburg High Court. This is an important 
development and a modest victory for the SECC, the APF, the Coalition 
Against Water Privatisation, the Social Movements Indaba, and other 
organizations and people who have been part of the campaign to protect 
everyone’s right to water. The court case is an important landmark in 
the 3 year old battle against the installation of water pre-paid meters 
in Soweto and elsewhere in the country. There is of course the very real 
danger that we can lose the case, but if that happens the struggle will 
continue despite that setback; our fate cannot be decided by a bourgeois 
judge using bourgeois law. But it is good thing to raise the issues in 
the public consciousness in the manner of the case especially if the 
legal strategy is strongly complimented by mass methods of struggle.

Marx in Soweto
On December 1 the SECC, together with Socialist Group and Keep Left, 
both left groups affiliated to the APF, organized a Marxism School in 
Soweto. The theme was “From resistance to revolution” inspired by the 
recent community uprisings and strikes, and by the 90th anniversary of 
the Russian Revolution. The event was attended by SECC activists, 
community members, employed workers and some left groups and political 
parties. The final rally gave a platform to activists from Kliptown, 
Thembelihle and Protea South, areas which rioted in support of their 
demand for service delivery in 2007. The panelists were asked: what next 
after the riots? This was a successful attempt at debating questions of 
strategy and vision beyond our daily struggles for water, electicity and 
houses. The emphasis was on the connection between the immediate and the 
long-term.

Remembering our fallen heroes
On November 18 the SECC decided to honour two comrades who passed away, 
namely, Comrades Bongani Lubisi and Sihle Mahlaba. The former was 
organizer of the SECC and the latter was a youth leader and also at the 
forefront of Rasa FM, the pirate youth radio station which broadcast for 
a few months in Soweto. The aim of the event was to remember and honour 
all those who have fallen in the course of the struggle and to inspire 
and build unity among the living. The event went very well and was 
attended by APF affiliates and fraternal organizations. Two tombstones 
emblazoned with the SECC, APF and OKM logos were unveiled in a sad but 
uplifting ceremony. The night vigil that preceded the day event 
consisted of political discussion and educational audiovisuals including 
videos depicting the late comrades. It was good that we remembered our 
real heroes during the same week that Piet “Promises” Koornhof died and 
was praised by some as some kind of hero. The smooth organization of 
this big event (many people attended) also indicated a strength in the 
SECC organization which has developed over many years of struggle.

The Soweto Strike Support Committee
During the course of 2007 the SECC, Keep Left and some trade unions 
formed a strike support committee during the Checkers Shoprite and the 
public sector strike. This work also covered the cleaners and security 
strikes to a limited extent. It involved meeting with striking workers 
and worker leaders and planning solidarity by the community for the 
strikes. Pickets were organized in support of the strikers by unemployed 
workers. Pamphlets and other media were produced in support of the 
strike. During the public sector strike some important meetings were 
held at the SECC hall. It must be mentioned that in both the Shoprite 
and public sector strike rank and file workers instructed their leaders 
to contact the SECC/APF for support. We are happy about this as we feel 
strongly that labour and community struggles need to be united despite 
the reluctance of the labour leaders to build real unity. The workers 
movement consists of both employed and unemployed workers; the labour 
leaders’ reluctance is an exercise in digging their own graves as will 
soon be apparent once the Zuma tsunami in a teacup has passed.

The parliamentary/council road
The OKM experience in 2007 was amazing, dramatic and an eye opener. As 
an electoral front of 7 Johannesburg affiliates of the APF, the OKM 
formally dissolved itself after winning one seat during the 2006 local 
government elections. The reason was that with the elections over there 
was no need for an electoral front; also and more importantly, the APF 
had refused to sanction the OKM strategy so it was felt to retreat in 
order to allow time to persuade the APF on this point. This retreat paid 
off as the APF is beginning to warm up to the OKM albeit no one wants to 
admit the error of their earlier hostile political judgment. But the 
drama and excitement happened during the first day of the September 
floor crossing period when to our shock we heard on the radio the 
Gauteng Democratic Alliance leader Jack Bloom announce that the OKM 
councilor had crossed the floor and joined them. This desperate move by 
the OKM incumbent councilor, Comrade Joyce Mkhonza, followed attempts by 
the OKM to recall her from her position. A central plank in the OKM 
platform is the right of recall. Comrade Joyce left the OKM but was 
unable to steal our seat thanks to good advice (from Ecopeace leader 
Comrade Alan Murphy and its lawyer Comrade John Govender) and timely 
action. A lot was gained from this harrowing experience, namely, the 
need to tightly control all public representatives, the fact that 
despite Thabo Mbeki’s mantra that dissatisfied communities must recall 
their councilors this is in fact not legally possible. We also got a 
practical lesson in the treachery of bourgeois parties e.g. the sneaky 
DA was acting as if it is our friend at one point defending Comrade 
Joyce during the constant howling and insults of the ANC councilors 
every time she stands up to speak. The OKM experience also helps us to 
ground the debate about the parliamentary road to socialism, the role of 
political parties, the centrality (or not) of the state in class 
struggle, etc. Our new councilor, Comrade Zodwa Madiba, has been an 
inspiration in terms of dedication to her work, her respect for ordinary 
people, carrying out of mandates and her willingness to learn. But the 
biggest lesson is that leaders need not to be trusted but to be controlled.

A comradely and mature politics
The SECC got a harsh lesson in new social movement politics when about 3 
years ago a group from within it split the organization. A new 
organization was formed, the Soweto Concerned Residents, and it was 
allowed to affiliate to the APF. This was a painful experience for the 
SECC but it taught us one thing: we should at all times strive to build 
unity as this is our strongest weapon against the enemy. Some of the 
reasons for the split although incidental to the main issues were also 
because the SECC was not paying enough attention to political 
management, conflict resolution and political maintenance of the 
organization. Today the comrades are very quick to pick out a grievance, 
a veiled threat, a muffled cry for help, lack of discipline, and so on. 
Even more importantly the SECC organization has acquired the habit of 
acting speedily in understanding and resolving actual or potential 
organizational problems. This result is more accountability, more 
commitment, more clarity and an increased success rate in our 
organizational endeavours. Team work in the struggle, as anywhere, 
requires trust but above all accountability systems. There are things or 
attributes that are hard to define but which undoubtedly are 
indispensable in building an organization of struggle such as the SECC 
and the APF. I had a very strong sense that the SECC had developed some 
of those attributes in 2007.

Research into the notion of class in Soweto
The SECC was involved in the University of Johannesburg’s research 
project into class in Soweto. This project is headed by Professor Peter 
Alexander, a comrade, and is sn intensive, empirical investigation of 
class dynamics and factors in a large township. The project hired some 
SECC comrades to do fieldwork and has involved the SECC in the 
formulation, implementation and results-analysis phases of the project. 
This has been a good thing for the SECC, comrades were encouraged to be 
curious about how people live, eat, drink and think and not just 
addressing them in a meeting or handing them a pamphlet. Without doubt 
knowledge about the people we work with and are primarily concerned 
about, that is, the working class, is invaluable if we are to succeed in 
our mission. The research findings problematised the concept of working 
class by showing that many people don’t see themselves as working class 
for various reasons. This is an intellectual, ideological and 
organizational challenge which from the discussions I have attended on 
the research the SECC comrades are willing and able to face.

4.Some comments on the SMI paper

The Social Movements Indaba had its meeting recently attended by CSS 
comrades Orlean Naidoo and Denis Brutus who are both present today. 
Although I do not have a major problem with the paper being in agreement 
with many parts of it, I was nevertheless struck by and moved to comment 
on the first 2 paragraphs of the paper which in part read:

The movement that brought down apartheid has collapsed. Traditional 
organizations such as trade unions and civics are no longer leading 
struggles. This is a difficult period for our social movements. We have 
no strategy for the building of our movement. (Report to SMI conference 
by secretary Comrade Mondli Hlatshwayo)

This pessimism of the intellect seems out of sync with reality and thus 
might hamper the development of an optimism of the heart. The workers’ 
movement in South Africa is in a bad state but has not collapsed; yes, 
it is in crisis, it is a movement without its heart and soul 
(solidarity), a movement without an enemy (the disease of class 
collaboration), a movement going nowhere in particular (no vision). 
Solidarity is the heart and soul of a workers’ movement but the 
post-apartheid situation has emphasised and encouraged individualism 
rather than collectivism. That is why you will find workers on strike at 
Shoprite but unionised truck drivers delivering supplies at the same 
shops as if it is business as usual. A community will fight against 
another community over who gets the RDP houses rather than fight for 
houses for all. Class collaboration is about a politics that tries to 
find a middle ground between boss and worker, exploiter and exploited, 
rider and horse. The idea promoted by the SACP during the negotiations 
with apartheid that some bosses are good and can be called our social 
partners served to rob the workers’ movement of an enemy leading to 
demobilisation and demoralisation. The result today is the wasted 
opportunities we saw with the failure by COSATU and SACP leaders to 
extend and generalise the public sector strike, combine it with private 
sector struggles in a mother of all strikes for a living wage in 
post-apartheid South Africa. Without (a socialist) vision we end locked 
in a daily and necessary struggle for survival but without ever turning 
this battle into one for solutions. A movement without a vision is a 
movement in a vacuum without any particular direction, a movement 
without a real way forward, a movement without a centre of authority.

It is not true that trade unions and civics no longer lead struggle. The 
public sector strike, the biggest in the history of South Africa, was 
organised and led by trade unions, including “reactionary” ones. Civics, 
including those controlled by SANCO, are sometimes involved in various 
ways in the communities, including in communities that riot or have an 
uprising. Sometimes such civics lead such uprisings, or are the 
opposition, or are there to pick up the pieces and share the spoils once 
the dust has settled.

The sentence “we have no strategy” is too categorical. Uniting social 
movements in the SMI is part of our strategy. I would add that we need 
to explore how our organisations can find a bridge between being 
movements “of grievances” into movements “of solutions”, or “of power”. 
We will find that any lasting solution to the quest to satisfy the needs 
of ordinary people must of necessity deal with the question of power. We 
need to have enough power to disrupt the plans of the ruling class in 
reality and not just in rhetoric. As a minimum we need to find ways of 
uniting all the present community and labour struggles on a common 
platform, we need to increase the national co-ordination of struggles, 
work to build a working class movement that unites young and old, 
employed and unemployed, men and women, gay and straight. I would add 
that, on the question of strategy, we need to prepare and build a 
movement towards a mass left political alternative to the ANC, namely, a 
mass workers party. Such a party would be based upon the existing 
struggles and movements but would distinguish itself in that it would 
also strive to link such struggles and movements to a struggle for 
political power. Our aim is to smash the bosses’ state and replace it 
with a popular state controlled and run by ordinary working class people 
and their class allies.

5.Some clarifications on vision

Comrade Patrick Bond points out that:

and it would be unreasonable to expect a “socialist” movement to develop 
from the national Social Movements Indaba (Focusing the struggle, FPIF 
Commentary, May 9, 2007, www.fpif.org)

I think it is important to clarify that the APF and SECC, for example, 
have adopted socialism as their “official” vision. This happened after 
long debates and stiff opposition from a minority of comrades under the 
influence of anarcho-autonomism or those with a gradualist formula for 
building socialist consciousness among the masses. Having lost the 
position some of these people are fond of denouncing the promotion of 
the socialist vision as an “imposition” on the rank and file. We 
disagree on the grounds of workers’ democracy and also because 
capitalism imposes itself daily on the masses hence the need for the 
socialist antidote.

The aim is not to turn the SMI into a socialist party but rather that it 
should adopt a socialist vision. Without a vision we will be locked in a 
perpetual struggle of survival and not of solutions. Without a vision we 
are not going to have hope because we will get tired as we struggle for 
bread on Tuesday, water on Wed, against eviction on Thursday, for ARVs 
on Friday and all over again the following week. Without hope there can 
be no confidence, without confidence the struggle will be weak. Without 
a vision it is harder to know where one is taking the struggle because 
reality is complex and there are many competing and legitimate interests 
at play.

As socialists we are not allowed or willing to “hold back” with our 
vision until “conditions are ripe” for socialism or for the masses to 
listen to a socialist message. We have to be part of “readying the 
conditions”, we cannot stand and wait, we must intervene and help the 
process along. We are not spectators, but actors albeit who act within 
given constraints. Certainly we must remove all the constraints that are 
in our power to do so e.g. nothing stops us debating the kind of society 
we want and the kind of organization or party that could help us reach 
such a society. This is not an academic discussion, it is not one 
reserved for struggle elites. There can be no socialism if the vast 
majority of workers are not thinking and talking in this way. What do we 
need to do to make this possible?

The challenge for the SMI is to show the connection between the 
struggles in the here and now – the single, bread and butter issues – 
and the equal, fair and just society we want to build in the future. It 
is not either-or, it is the link between the two that we must focus upon 
and develop.

6.Comradely difference and a common vision

How do we promote and nurture a socialist vision? It is important to 
note that a vision can be neglected, trampled upon and be abandoned. Or 
it can be protected, nurtured and shared. For this you need, besides 
just talking about it, campaigns, struggles and solidarity action that 
involve the masses. You need hope, you need anger, you need hatred. You 
need to hate the capitalists because they are liars, thieves and 
murderers. You need to hate their system and strive to destroy it as a 
condition for the advancement of human kind as a whole. You need to hope 
for a different system based on solidarity and the unity of the class 
and the satisfaction of all its needs.

I think today more than at any other time we need a constructive method 
of promoting discussion and dealing with internal political differences. 
(What is happening to the ANC in Polokwane is terrible and can be 
avoided). This requires patience and understanding and not labelling and 
rejection. We must eschew the use of derogatory language against 
comrades no matter how wrong they might be e.g. don’t call comrades 
thugs, opportunists, counter-revolutionaries, etc. In order to persuade 
fellow comrades and workers we need respect, patience and understanding. 
We cannot persuade our class brothers and sisters by using 
(bureaucratic) power, threats and violence.

Finally, I agree with Comrade Mondli’s sentiments that we need:

the progress of the proletariat from being a class "in itself" (a 
position in the social structure) to being one "for itself" (an active 
and conscious force that can change the world).

For me this process involves building both the working class movement of 
today and the working class party of the future.

Thank you for affording me the opportunity to share some of my ideas 
with you here at CCS. I am learning a lot. Viva bahlali! Viva basebenzi! 
Phambili nge-socialism!



Please note: I have put as appendices two articles by the Socalist Group 
which I think elaborate on some important themes touched in this short 
paper. Enjoy!

Appendix 1: Unity of labour and community

STRIKES NEED THE SUPPPORT OF THE UNEMPLOYED
Where does this problem of suffering unemployment come from - even when 
there is money and work? Where does this problem of not having food to 
eat come from - even when there is money and work? You will make a very 
bad mistake if you think it comes from workers who are on strike. The 
problems are there, every day - even when workers are not on strike. The 
problem of unemployment does not start when they go on strike. The 
problem of not having enough money for things that we need does not 
start when they go on strike. These problems are there already every day 
when workers are not on strike. They are parts of capitalism. They are 
there because of the system of profits which is about bosses making 
money, not the needs of the working class and poor people. Workers go on 
strike because of these problems. They go on strike to fight against 
these problems. The strike is part of the struggle to stop the problems 
- it is not the cause of the problems. Of course the bosses want to hide 
this truth. They want the unemployed to blame the employed and the 
employed to blame the unemployed - we must blame each other and fight 
each other. Then they are being protected while we are struggling 
against each other, not them.
There is only one group of people who can truly say: “We will rather 
suffer unemployment than take the job of a striker.” Who is that group? 
It is workers who are suffering unemployment already everyday. But 
instead of suffering so the bosses can make profits, in a strike it is 
different. When they protect and support strikers, they are suffering so 
that workers can be stronger against the bosses.
There is only one group of people who can truly say: “We will rather be 
hungry than fill our stomachs because we have taken the job of a 
striker.” That group is workers who are already hungry everyday because 
the bosses have forced them into unemployment. But when they support a 
strike it is different. Now they are not just hungry so that the bosses 
can cut costs and make more profits. When they protect and support 
strikers, they are suffering so that workers can be stronger against the 
bosses.
You can think you are no-one because you have not got a job. You can 
think that what the bosses say is true - it is your own fault. You are 
just rubbish. But that is nonsense. It is their lies. You are a victim. 
They make you the victim of their system. But when you support strikers 
against them? What is happening? You are not a victim. You are not 
letting them make you a victim. You are not letting them use you against 
your brothers and sisters today, so that they can throw you out when 
they do not need you. Then one day, when it is time for you to go on 
strike they can use your own brothers and sisters against you. No. Even 
with an empty stomach, you are saying no. Even with an empty stomach you 
are deciding what is right and what is wrong. Even with an empty stomach 
you are giving the strikers a support that no-one else can give them. 
Protecting them in a way that no-one else can protect them. 
Strengthening in a way that no-one else can strengthen them. That is the 
story of a victim who will not accept that you must be a victim. That is 
the story of people who are making history. It is the story of soldiers 
in the class struggle.

Appendix 2: Approach to bourgeois elections

At the time of elections – the ordinary workers matter before the candidates

At the time of elections, they tell us that our eyes must be on the 
candidates. Who are they? Do they care? What will they do? Will they 
deliver? Of course these are important questions. Of course it is 
important whether the candidates are honest, whether they care, what 
politics they believe in, whether they commit themselves to workers 
democracy and accountability with recall. But Marxists say something 
else. At the time of the elections, our eyes must be on the masses. To 
really take the struggle forward will depend on them, not the councilor 
or whoever is elected. It will depend on the manifesto of demands and 
action which the masses follow, not the manifesto of demands and 
promises which the candidates offer.

The truth is that it is possible for an elected individual to make sure 
that they are not accountable to the masses. The laws of bourgeois 
democracy make that very easy. Once you are elected, you can not be 
recalled. The only people who can get rid of you according to the law 
are your bosses in the political party that you stand for. The law does 
not say you are accountable even to those who voted for you. There are 
examples all over the place of councilors and others who are elected who 
will say straight out to the masses: “don’t tell me what to do. You are 
not in charge of me. I am elected and that is the end of the story.” 
That is very easy in the bosses democracy. But if you are elected and 
you truly want to make yourself accountable? The truth is that you can 
help in that process. You can try to build it – but only the masses 
themselves can make sure that it happens.

It is exactly the same thing with using the position of councillor to 
try to make sure that people get what they need. It is very easy to 
trample on their needs. That is what almost every elected politician in 
the country is doing. But to serve those needs? You can truly want to. 
You can help in that process. But only the masses themselves can make 
sure that it happens. Even when you are sitting inside the councils of 
bourgeois democracy, the strength you have to make something happen is 
not inside the council, It is not a strength in your hands. It is 
outside the council, amongst the rank and file. It is the strength in 
their hands. That is your strength when you sit inside the council.

 From every side we are hearing that apart from the candidates, this 
election is about delivery. A revolutionary councilor is not like a take 
away service where you ring up and get what you want. If that was 
possible, maybe some people would like that option. But it is not 
possible. We can say that a revolutionary councilor will serve the 
people. But again, it is not like a counter where you go and pay and get 
a service. All of that is based on the capitalist vision – of buying 
something and paying for it from someone else who has it. A 
revolutionary councilor does not have what ordinary working class people 
need. That councilor will be lying if he or she promises “delivery”. The 
power to solve the problems facing the working class every day is not in 
the hands of any one person or any few people. It is only in the hands 
of the mass of the working class.

A left wing councilor will not be able to solve any of those problems 
alone. It will never be enough if he or she focuses on delivery; or on 
policies. It will only be enough if he or she promises the only thing 
that is actually honest and possible: “I will be there in every struggle 
that I can reach. If I can not be there, in my flesh, I will be there in 
my spirit. I will support every single demand for the things that 
ordinary working class people need. I will test these demands against 
one law: the law of what people need to live decent human lives. I know 
about the laws of profits. I know also that these laws stand in the way 
of people taking and getting what they need. The policies I will devote 
my life to are not about delivery. They are about organizing, 
mobilizing, building and action. I will never be able to develop these 
policies or give life to them alone. Alone, I can not make myself a 
revolutionary councilor. I need you. Only you can make that happen.”

Behind the focus on service delivery, the bosses are relaxing. They are 
protected, ignored and invisible. The eyes are on the council and the 
candidates. The ordinary worker must direct all their anger at the 
councilor and the council – and the bosses remain invisible and 
protected. And when they like, they come from behind the protection to 
make their demands – “cut taxes, cut rates, give us special concessions, 
make it cheaper for us to do business.” The truth is that the ideas of 
the ruling class – their bourgeois ideology – operate in many different 
ways. The idea of service delivery is part of this bourgeois ideology. 
We do something for you – vote for you – now you deliver. You govern 
over us – in return, you must deliver to us. We pay, you deliver. The 
most that ordinary working class people are allowed to do is to decide 
who will govern over them. Someone else must do it – ordinary working 
class people are not allowed to do it with and for each other. And the 
most that can ever come from this someone else? To deliver whatever 
services are possible as long as bosses can make profits out of the 
process. To give what is left over after the bosses have taken the share 
that will satisfy them and allow them to keep their power. This is the 
ethic, the morality, of capitalism. Our ethic is different. The 
socialist ethic of the working class is about caring and sharing. It is 
about working together to help and look after each other. It is about 
collective self-government – not giving the power to govern to a few 
people who are on top of us.

The concentration on delivery started at the time of the RDP. At that 
time, most people on the left argued that there is a crisis of delivery. 
They are making the same argument today. That is a crisis about what the 
government is doing or not doing. Yes. It is a crisis. Yes, we struggle 
against the government because of what it is doing and not doing. But 
that is exactly where the solution lies – not in the hands of this or 
another government, but in the hands of the mass of ordinary working 
class people. Amongst those people, where the solution lies, there is 
another crisis. Like there was at the time of the RDP. It is a crisis of 
hope, of politics, of the deep belief that ordinary working class people 
can really succeed together to make a better and different world.

None of this means that we stand outside the struggle for the things 
that people need. We are there, in that struggle. It can be called 
delivery. It is about ordinary working class people mobilizing together 
to demand and take what they need – to force even the bosses and the 
bosses politicians to give something. We fight that struggle against a 
bosses government and the capitalists and capitalist system that they 
protect. But the struggle is not going to be won by having a councilor 
or even a government that is serious about delivery. It is going to be 
won when we take power from the capitalist class and use the wealth to 
build a new socialist system of caring and sharing.