This was published in TimesLive on 08 August 2025
The poet Khalil Gibran writes, "Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
They come through you
but not from you, and though they belong with you, they belong not to
you". This is a synoptic capitulation of the conundrum of being an
influential, primarily political, asset of society and a parent to your
children.
If you are a politician,
particularly a Black South African politician, what may seem like the pinnacle
of your career could turn into a burden for your children. The idea that human
career advancement relies on connections, including those with parents, does
not necessarily apply to the children of political leaders and figures. While most
parents' children must cultivate relationships to build their social capital,
this can become a double-edged sword for the children of politicians.
Every business school
and business literature emphasises leveraging visible or invisible networks.
Success, especially in business and arguably in many other fields, is closely
tied to having solid and expansive relationships. Some individuals are born
into these connections, while others must work diligently to create them.
Regardless, the more connected a person is, the greater their business
advantage.
Most mentorship programs
include a crucial point: being qualified and skilled at your job is just the
starting point. The real differentiators are the risks you take and the people
you know. A relationship portfolio serves as social capital, providing an edge
over those lacking such connections. Being born into certain families equates
to social capital. It positions individuals as nodes or pivots that others would
forever seek to work with or around. The ethical and lawful use of such capital
distinguishes those born with a "silver spoon" from those who must
strive to find their way. The arc of ethicality with social capital has
historically bent towards those who seek to have it instead of those born into
it.
The boundaries of
political integrity are often blurred in a country like South Africa, where
mere allegations of corruption against political leaders can be weaponised to
undermine rivals. The breath of disrepute as a concept to attach to malfeasance
and corruption has made this terrain of politicking the murkiest. Many capable
individuals, whom the nation would have preferred to see in leadership
positions, select to lead private lives instead, fearing the repercussions a political
career may have on their families.
Consider the bright
young individuals who have used their parents' social capital to achieve
success. Their merit-based accomplishments are frequently overshadowed by
perceptions of who their parents are. This context also affects individuals whose
what they considered normal before may suddenly be an integrity burden.
The jury is still out on
whether keeping money in foreign currency in your house when you are a high-end
game auctioneer was normal until the Phala Phala saga foregrounded the
possibility of illegality. Equally, it may be questionable what is wrong for a
politician to live in an expensive mansion owned by his sons or daughters.
Moreover, South Africa
has not evolved into a society where politics is considered a legitimate career
path for making a living. Due to historical context, many African cultures
expect politics to be a calling rather than a profession, discouraging the
notion of wealth accumulation from political involvement. While it is
acceptable for other occupations to engage in transactions and earn brokerage
fees, political connections exist outside this profitable framework.
Without any briefing for
Paul Mashatile, who this commentary argues does not have the profile of a
communications powerhouse, it is evident that the attack on his character is
part of a coordinated campaign. His family’s wealth, potentially amassed
through means similar to those of many others who facilitate transactions for a
fee, is persistently framed in a context that implies corruption from the
outset.
It appears there is a
deliberate agenda to select one or two well-positioned individuals to assume
leadership of political parties, subjecting them to public character scrutiny.
Some media outlets have taken on the role of modern-day executioners in the
civic sphere, inflicting severe damage that even their children become
collateral in this battle, posing risks of intergenerational and class reversal
implications. If this is not a form of public lynching, its fairness is
yet to be judged, given the selective nature of who falls victim.
What worsens this
disregard of the implications for the politician as a parent and the children
who came through the politicians, not by choice, is the ruthlessness of
succession battles in political parties. They forget that chaos, calamity, and
scorched-earth political contestations are not inevitable because their parties
might be in irreversible decline. How they manage the deterioration or the
insatiable appetite to ‘phata’ at all costs might become a permanent
catastrophe for generations.
Dr FM Lucky Mathebula is the
Head of Faculty, People Management, and founder of The Thinc Foundation, a
think tank based at the Da Vinci Institute.
Comments
Post a Comment