An edited version of this article was published here.
The ANC and DA are not serious about
dialogue.
Chris Spies
2 April 2017
The failure of our leading political parties to
take dialogue seriously is tragic and very, very dangerous.
When cadres are lining up in battle formations
along the crack lines of constant contestation and competition, those in the
shrinking middle retreat into their political and ideological corners.
Political parties love it, because this is how they mobilise their supporters.
We are steadily descending into an abyss, step
by step, judged by Friederich Glasl’s Nine Stages of Conflict Escalation: tensions, moving beyond debate to humiliating
actions, coalitions and loss of prestige, threats, limited attacks and
destroying the enemy. We not only have a destructive conflict. The conflict has
us and the cracks are getting wider by the day.
The glue that binds us together is our common
humanity — our ability to rehumanise one another. We can only do that if we
dare to step out of our corners into the uncomfortable safe spaces of genuine
interaction where we listen to each other deeply enough to be changed by what we
learn.
It seems as if the ANC and DA beg to differ.
In 2012 City Press published my article “Is the ANC serious about dialogue?” in which I said that
ANC Policy Documents showed no signs that the party took dialogue seriously. How
could we preach to the rest of the world that they should dialogue when we
allow dialogue to slip out of our vocabulary and our practice?
The 2017 ANC discussion documents confirm my worst fears:
There is zero interest in getting South Africans talking across the divides.
Zilch. See for yourselves.
There is not a single mention of dialogue
in the “Legislature and Governance”, Organisational Renewal and Organisational Design, Economic Transformation and Strategy and Tactics of the ANC documents.
The International Relations document states that there is
“no progress towards dialogue and a political solution for a two-state solution
in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”; that there is a need to “Strengthen
North-South Dialogue”; and that the ANC need to assess “the ideological
orientation and character of the various fraternal organisations and parties on
the continent to identify those with political visions that are reconcilable
with that of the ANC to determine the basis of party- to-party dialogue.”
The Peace and Stability document, which one expects
would call for dialogue in South Africa, mentions dialogue only once under,
wait for it, the “Correctional Services” heading. There is a “Victim–offender
Mediation and Dialogue” programme with the aim of “placing victims
at the centre of its activities.”
at the centre of its activities.”
So, I thought, surely the Social Transformation
document would prove my scepticism wrong. At least everyone realises
that social transformation is about weaving the fabric of a society that
transforms itself because citizens converge towards common values and standards
through ongoing multi-stakeholder dialogues, right? Social transformation happens
because people understand why change and transformation are needed and are
coming together to transform the root causes of inequality, injustice, racism,
corruption, not true?
No, there is not even a hint that social
transformation includes dialogue. The only reference to dialogue is in relation
to the “outcomes of people’s dialogues through izimbizo and other stakeholder
consultations” … [that formed] … the basis for the policy shift from “housing
to human settlements development”.
A policy dialogue in 2014 is the only mention of
dialogue in the Education, Health, Science and Technology document.
The title of Communications and the Battle of Ideas document
already indicates that it’s all about winning the battle of ideas. If your
purpose is to win, then there is no dialogue to think together, understand and
explore.
And what about the media, which ought to be one
of the prime platforms for dialogue? No,
all that is needed is “a debate about media transformation … [which] does not
happen in a vacuum and must be located within the broader debate regarding
dismantling of monopoly capital and radical economic transformation”. The media
“has
also played a part in trying to thwart ANC and its alliance partners
initiatives to initiate radical transformation…The ANC must focus on breaking
up such monopolies and on ensuring participation of black South Africans, and in particular Africans (my emphasis), in all sectors of the
media and across the media value chain.”
The only ray of light is in the paragraph on
“Fourth Industrial Revolution…that will impact on all aspects of the South
African society” … [which will make] … it necessary that effective structures
for ongoing dialogue on the challenges and opportunities take place between a
range of stakeholders on a continuous basis”.
The DA fares even worse. Only two out of seventeen
policy documents mention dialogue: three times in Arts, Culture and Heritage policy document and once
in Labour Policy document. Art is useful “to continue an open dialogue
about our history and heritage” and “to facilitate dialogue between different
cultures and people around the world” and the National Economic Development and
Labour Council (NEDLAC) … was intended to be a forum for social dialogue, and
the platform for consensus-building around mechanisms to promote social
development and economic growth.”
That is it. Nothing more.
As a dialogue practitioner I am absolutely
stunned.
How did both the ANC and the DA not notice that
they consistently fail to use the language of dialogue, and to differentiate
between dialogue, on the one hand, and consultations, debate, discussions and
negotiations, on the other hand? Do they genuinely believe that talking only to
themselves and shouting to their opponents will lead us anywhere?
There is simply nothing to suggest that the ANC
and DA have a vision of a country that has dialogue as its first default
response to problems. When there is no vision there is also not an understanding
of what can go wrong if we don’t dialogue.
The ANC and DA are just like political parties everywhere:
They look as far as their political noses and focus only on the next elections.
President Jacob Zuma said the ANC, comes first — not the country — because
without the ANC the people will be misled and will stay under perpetual
oppression. Yes, uBaba, if the ANC is the saviour, why would you put the
country first? If the ANC will rule until Jesus comes what is there to
dialogue about?
It is clear that the ANC and DA, and most likely
all parties in parliament, have no clue that dialogue is the “Art of thinking
together,” as William Isaacs says:
”Dialogue … is about a shared inquiry, a way of thinking
and reflecting together…” When we enter into “unwitting ‘argument’ mode’ … [we]
… stand in a stagnated pond of our own predispositions and certainties and
blindly defend what we have as necessary and unalterable.”
Standing blind and sinking deeper into in a
stinking stagnated pond is killing us as a nation.
The failure to lead us on a path of dialogue is
the surest way not to achieve radical economic transformation, because we are
wasting tax payers money and ignoring a cheaper and more effective way of
solving our problems.
We pay millions to investigate allegations of
wrongdoing and waste taxpayers money to fight senseless and avoidable court
cases but we fail to create a dialogue mechanism to help us work problems out
amongst ourselves. We have fallen far behind Ghana and Kenya who created functioning institutional
mechanisms to foster dialogue and mediate conflict.
It does not have to be like that. What should we
as citizens do?
It is very clear that we cannot rely on
politicians to lead us towards dialogue. The polarised political climate
characterised by destructive parliamentary behaviour, internal factional
battles, power struggles, allegations of corruption, state capture, and the
tendency to inflict maximum insults and damage on political opponents make
political leaders part of the problem — not the solution.
In 2012 Brigalia Bam wrote
“Our young democracy is now entering into a phase where we can no longer ignore
the value of dialogue. No longer can we rely on our struggle credentials and
our past heroes. We need to become the heroes of today and tomorrow. Our legacy
should not be sought in monuments for fallen heroes, but in a united nation
that unlocks the potential of all its people, especially the youth.”
How do we unlock the potential of everyone?
Refuse to live in fear and do not become part of
a faction. The middle ground is the most dangerous space, but we will have to
occupy it and enlarge it. Make the circle wider.
Refuse to be used as voting cattle that only
count during election times. Your vote is not for sale. Do not believe anything
people in power tell you. Find out for yourself. (One of my favourite quotes is
“Never believe anything until it is officially denied.”)
We cannot afford to take the foot off the
citizens’ action accelerator. This is
our country. We do it for the sake of our children and grandchildren.
Rehumanise one another. Listen, talk, engage, and
seek first to understand and then to be understood.
Make friends. Eat, pray, cry, laugh and dance together. Share what you have and
be generous.
We are, as Paul Hawken
says, part of the immune system of this planet. We can transform stagnated
ponds into running rivers.
Chris Spies is an independent conflict
transformation and dialogue practitioner at Dynamic Stability. He is a Senior
Fellow at the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation and facilitator of
Unyoke Retreats for international and South African peacebuilders.
