Institutional leadership might be the Restraint the ANC needs.

For nearly thirty years since the ANC was unbanned and Nelson Mandela was released, the ANC has been seen as an essential leadership institution, with minimal competition in shaping South Africa's transformation agenda. Society largely agreed, especially because of the visible leadership qualities of its representatives and the institution it projected, which it indeed was at times. However, after about fifteen years post-unbanning, particularly since it diverged from traditional leadership selection and succession practices, this consensus started to weaken. Gradually, more voices began to call for developing alternative ideas to reduce the country's reliance on the ANC as the primary source of reasoning for national transformation and nation-building. Recognising social capital's role can inspire the audience to see collective effort as vital for renewal. 

These were the initial steps toward advocating a strategy of restraint, as the nation began emphasising the promises of liberation embedded in its constitution and the values it upholds. This shift aligned with the prevailing consensus among the leadership cohort still guiding the ANC and other parties as key institutions of leadership in the 90s. Interestingly, this new consensus also became evident within the ANC itself, as many of its thinkers left its traditional forums to establish think tanks as safer spaces for ideological development. The focus of this evolving consensus centred on 'national rather than party political interest'.

 

In this new trajectory, the ANC was influenced by the circumstances of its growing failure to create a capable state, the growing threat of corruption and its adjunct, state capture, and the need to decide whether to remain a bystander as an institution while individuals, as organs of the liberation movement, were wrecking its almost 120-year reputation. Even the left-leaning among its members, who had historically advocated a state-led nation-building programme, or, in appropriate nomenclature, a 'national democratic society', began to question the excesses that accompanied the unbridled exercise of executive authority and the degree of arbitrariness that characterised government, to the point where the left began to sound right in economic thinking. 

 

The departure of thinkers from the ANC shifted most potential solutions to its worsening problems into academic journals, seminars, conferences, and public lectures attended mainly by a knowledgeable elite. This group shared powerful insights among themselves, leading to a kind of informed ignorance about the real context of emerging issues. The lack of meaningful content in interactions among rising ANC members led to rhetoric becoming the primary form of political engagement at sub-national conferences. The decline of effective policy review at these conferences exemplifies this deterioration. The ANC's institutional leadership was gradually replaced by radio talk shows, opinion articles by sponsored or independent analysts, and the emergence of 'individuals' who became symbols of a distorted ANC identity. This shift was driven by manufactured stalwartism designed to undermine the ANC's tradition of staying attuned to its constituents' true needs.

 

As a leadership institution, the ANC historically carried out its tasks—such as research, cadre selection and training, education, communication, and information dissemination—within an institutional framework as a liberation movement. This was supported by a capable administrative centre, which at times could be presented as a 'ready to govern' proposition. The ANC's existence depended on its ability to be institutionalised, making its policies tangible within that structure. Its true strength lies in being an institution, serving as a political construct and a mediator for reconciling conflicting member interests, even if that sometimes compromises its institutional strength in pursuit of those interests. To maintain resilience, the organisation must detect institutional issues early, as effective leadership inherently involves balancing stability with tensions that often lead to disorder or anarchism. 

 

As it sought to guide society through the transition to a new constitutional order, the ANC opted to preserve the state while reorganising how the government, as the active agent, would repurpose it to forge a 'national democratic society.' Even as the momentum of the liberation struggle intensified toward insurrection, the idea of creating a new nation with restraint also gained traction among the political elite. The potential for current leaders during the anti-apartheid struggle to wield power was viewed through a lens that emphasised the long-term limitations of victory or defeat in such a conflict. This focus on unity and shared purpose can encourage the audience to believe in the possibility of a collective future. 

 

At present, the African National Congress (ANC) is examining ways to align itself with the legal framework it has established as part of the construction of a 'national democratic society.' Its terminology underscores a 'national democratic revolution' that is still in progress and requires further refinement. The effort to locate scapegoats, justifications, and explanations for not fully utilising the Constitution as a tool for societal transformation may lead to perceptions of the NDR as being anti-constitutional and anti-statist. The re-emergence of a restrained leadership style, exemplified by President Ramaphosa, along with its associated challenges, should be carefully balanced to leverage constitutionalism—an approach that society has largely accepted from the ANC in recent years—in establishing a 'national democratic society.' The current window of influence appears to be during President Ramaphosa’s tenure, according to recent polling data. His support consistently surpasses that of the ANC, indicating the need for a leadership team capable of uniting around him to identify which aspects of the 'NDR' can be pursued at this stage without alienating supporters of his cautious approach, which aligns with his organisation's principles.

 

The fact that business is comfortable with his leadership and approach to transformation—there is no evidence to suggest otherwise—should signal to the ANC that a viable consensus exists. His restraint can help achieve the most critical transformation goals while minimising the alienation of coalition members in the push towards a 'national democratic society.' In this process, he can also attract new supporters from the remaining pragmatic factions. This stage in our journey toward a better future is not unfamiliar, except for the ongoing challenge posed by some within the ANC's insatiable appetite for power.

 

Only when ANC members begin to view the ANC as a true leadership institution and understand that both members and leaders should refine rather than alter its longstanding direction, will it avoid veering down a destructive path. They need to accept this, recognising that even the strongest institutions can decline and become distorted. The ANC's success in transforming societal discontent into a constitutional framework may have drained its intellectual vigour, as it revelled in its achievements. Simultaneously, this pride could have fostered a sense that no further innovation was necessary, leading to arrogance and overconfidence. This awareness can inspire humility and caution in the audience, emphasising the importance of institutional resilience.

 

The ANC should focus on how it engages with its most capable members to foster renewal and rebuilding. It needs to recognise the influence of individual networks and the social capital they provide, which enhances its credibility as it strives to regain its leadership role in society. The Ramaphosa leadership episode presents an opportunity to develop a process that leverages the social capital that individuals contribute to the organisation. Unfortunately, for the ANC, the person it presents to the public often reflects the organisation's overall value to the public. Moreover, that individual's passion and commitment will significantly shape the integrity of the organisation's value proposition. 

 

Whilst it might be hard to formulate the ANC's attitude on many political matters, its objective of a 'national democratic society' should steer clear of its emerging extremes. Properly constructed and institutionalised, its attitude to its role, albeit declining, as leader of society, if indeed true, should tolerate individual eccentricities and be receptive, as it was with Mandela and maybe failed with Tutu, to mega-personalities, whether manufactured or real, as a way of providing ground for a convergence of extremes. There must be a sense of rank and merit in the ANC. Personalities in the ANC, including Ramaphosa, Magashule, Lindiwe Sisulu, Zweli Mkhize, David Mabuza, Paul Mashatile, the 101 Veterans, and many others, have an established interdependence with the ANC. Their polarity will never be without tension. CUT!!!