Gaetano Mosca, an Italian thinker and politician, submits that "in all societies...two classes of people appear: a class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class, always the less numerous, performs all political functions, monopolises power, and enjoys advantages that power brings, whereas the second, the more numerous class, is directed and controlled by the first." His theory is that people are not always born elite; elites can be manufactured from each class or caste.
In South Africa, this class reality was interrupted by race as the dominant vector in class analysis. The ruling class is an outcome of racio-social engineering. It is fascinating that even within the racial enclaves, society hierarchised itself regarding the ruling and ruled classes. Unfortunately, this has established a rule that, as a practical matter, things should neither be nor could be otherwise, save that elites must be protected.
Inevitably, the elites grew into an internally homogeneous, unified, and self-conscious group in conditions of what they consider stability. Contrary to what
they believe, the elites are not a collection of individuals but an
agglomeration of common behaviours and beliefs packaged in diverse ideological
orientations.
This
explains why elites interpret what is revolutionary for the poor. Liberals,
neoliberals, socialists, communists, or any ideological orientation know of,
about, and each other save for their occasional differences of opinion about
social phenomena.
Elites
are self-perpetuating and are drawn from an exclusive segment of society. Successful societies can manage elite succession planning from amongst those who graduate, in almost all instances, after a revolution or a qualitatively different election. Essentially, elitism is
about and always ends with the autonomy or sovereignty of the individuals
inside the collective. This character, content, and form of elitism is
non-racial.
We live in a society where being elite is about preserving accumulated privileges by an exclusive few. It is interesting to observe how the command of revolutionary nomenclature continues to be an elite vocation and a memory verse issue for those who are not elite.
Like
in other post-revolution societies, from the 1789 French Revolution, which was seminal in ideation terms, to the continuous National Democratic Revolution of South Africa, elites have always been catalysts for inequality or equity. The budget debate, including its rigorous reinterpretation, will ultimately result in the reconfiguration of the elite structure in the RSA. It is manufacturing new heroes, thinkers, and genuine leaders of
society.
The times we find ourselves in are about rediscovering our national concept of leadership and a leader. The net thrown around in the form of calling every Duma, Sibongile, and Nkosana "my leader" or "leader" is about finding the concept away from the immediate post-democratic breakthrough's "my chief", "commander", "commissar" and suchlike.
Ultimately, the success or failure of the elite will determine whether the country overcomes its challenges.
Comments
Post a Comment