In a response to the FW de Klerk Tribute that was written on the Thinc Blog, by myself, a question was asked "Prof Khalanga. I think that both *** and *** comments might have had an unintended effect: that of closing the discussion. But I wish to engage openly on this matter. I would be interested to hear your view about De Klerk’s contribution to Black people and democratic South Africa in general. Let’s engage".
THIS WAS AND IS MY ANSWER
1. At the onset of his career, Post-Apartheid South Africa's first Deputy President, under President Nelson Mandela, Mr FW de Klerk, was not an ordinary bystander, but a senior operative in the consolidation of Apartheid as an ideology to institutionalise 'whiteness' or 'white supremacy' in South Africa.
2. His National Party royalty backgrounding, including going through the ranks of secret societies and cultural institutions landed, and/or rewarded, him in/with the highest political office in the country, President of the Republic of South Africa. A position no ordinary person just ascends to.
3. He was thus a convergence point through which the executive authority of the state, which vested in him, and all other authorities, including that of private capital, was used to establish the economic duality we are in. A duality of an economy of poor people, mainly black in general and baNtu in particular, and well resourced people, mainly non-black.
4. In the context of him being President of Apartheid South Africa, there is very little, and in the eyes of black people, that could be recorded which he contributed to Black People, albeit still arguable if compared to times apartheid was formally off the statutes. In fact, more about what he contributed to entrench a system that was declared a crime against humanity could, and still dependent on the choices of the historian and truth, be attached to his name.
5. However, it is what he did, after what he refers to as his conversion, later in his career that has started a series, if not a domino of events, that led to present day Democratic South Africa, which defines him differently or better that he was in the history of South Africa.
6. It is true that his famous and historical February 2, 1990 speech was also occasioned by the pressure that the ANC-led Mass Democratic Movement and the Global pressure to change that was on Apartheid South Africa. This argument can not be faulted, but cannot stand as the only thesis of and about why the speech was made. If diversity of opinion is a condition of politics, then our politics must accept that some might interpret the speech as a 'strategic move'. Only history will attest who was ready to war on the negotiating table. Emerging evidence is revealing interesting trends.
7. It is however also true that amongst Apartheid South Africa's leaders, he stands out as the one that had the appropriate courage and timing to act on; the truthfulness of his conversion; the pressure that was put by the MDM on his government; the global pressure for him to change; and most importantly, the pressure that South Africa's posterity convicted him and a coterie of NP leaders that included 'comrades Roelf Meyer, Gert Oosthuizen and many other NP-to-ANC converted comrades that secures him the space history has unapologetically abrogated to him.
8. In his response to all of the above, he set in motion a historical process that required a rare breed of leadership given the stakes and odds that were obtaining in South Africa and the world. Together with Mandela, the represented constituencies who were at different temperature levels in respect of their expectations of the process. It was to others a victory march inside a process that might have hollowed out the essence of the very victory, and to others it was a process of despair that might have had victories that were not in their purview, and yet it was a victory for posterity, than incumbents. This defines him and Mandela to a level the Nobel Committee confirmed with a peace price.
9. The contribution of Mr de Klerk to South Africa, and as he has always wanted it to be known, is dispersed in the Constitution that Presidents Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, Kgalema Motlhanthe, Jacob Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa have taken an Oath of Office to protect and defend. These oaths they took, were on behalf of the mandate South Africans gave them in a national election after members of the ANC, in good standing, have selected them as the face of what the ANC represents. This means what he considers his contribution enjoyed and still enjoys the endearment of the liberation movement, in fact, there is a resolution to adopt a Constitution that contains elements of his February 2, 1990, speech.
10. His contribution, as part of the bouquet that many other leaders of his generation who negotiated our political settlement and accord, includes therefore, the enablement that the Constitution of South Africa has made for me, and all of us, to enjoy the inalienable right to determine, as we have given him the November 1 showstopper, who has the legitimacy to govern based on our will as South Africans. The people shall govern has found expression in what he contributed into founding, as he lawfully ended what inhibited it.
11. Out of that enablement emerged other good and bad actions, interactions, and transactions between and amongst us as South Africans to advance what the Constitution has in store for us. Some amongst us, including in this group, find the Constitution to be a constraint to the trajectory of development their expectations have defined, whilst others, like me, believe in the fact that the 'dream has been delivered' by the Constitution some amongst us might have 'deferred' it.
12. On the strength of the above, and many other benefits that came of his decisions, and out of the February 2, 1990 speech, former Deputy President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr de Klerk, has earned a place in our nation's history no amount of denialism will remove. Yes, in earning that place, like many historical figures, he has trampled on many, and for that, he apologised.
13. Thank you Bohani for an opportunity to engage devoid of cliches` often thrown onto what should be enriching to all of us. I hope I have not disappointed.
By the way, the question was asked by Bohani Shivambu, who also wrote for the Thinc Blog.
🤷🏽♂️Ndzi hlamurhile
Comments
Post a Comment