John Kane-Berman, FW De Klerk and his spokesman Dave Steward have recently highlighted the NDR, which Kane-Berman describes as “the blueprint for a totalitarian socialist state released in 1962 by the South African Communist Party and regularly reaffirmed by the ANC since then”.
If true, that would make the pre-Zuma ANC less appealing than the DA suggested at the opposition election manifesto launch on Sunday.
In 2012 much fun was made of whether President Jacob Zuma had the terminology wrong when he spoke of a “second transition” . Yet the ANC’s policy conference in that year adopted a document outlining the “second phase of the transition”. This was endorsed at the ANC national conference at Mangaung.
Behind the frivolity was a serious intent, which surfaced again last week when Zuma replied to the debate in Parliament on his State of the National Address. No doubt partially in response to the rise of Julius Malema’s Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), Zuma pledged the ANC will “intensify the implementation of affirmative action policies in order to deepen reconciliation and social cohesion in our country”.
Zuma said that after the elections, “the country will enter a new radical phase in which we shall implement socio-economic transformation policies and programmes that will meaningfully address poverty, unemployment and inequality”.
According to Steward these ideas form the core of the second phase of the NDR. To understand his thinking we can revisit a speech made by De Klerk on January 31, in which he said: “The ANC sees itself, not as an ordinary political party, but as a national liberation movement with an uncompleted revolutionary mandate. It sees ‘the continuing legacy of colonialism and white minority rule’ as the ‘defining reality of our society’.
Referring to the manoeuvring which led to the 1994 elections, De Klerk said: “Unlike its negotiating partners, the ANC did not view the constitutional negotiations as the means to achieving a final national constitutional accord. Instead it saw them as a means to achieving a beachhead of state power – which would then enable it to shift the balance of forces further to its own advantage. In the process it admits that it had to make constitutional compromises that it regarded as temporary expedients necessitated by the then prevailing balance of forces.”
In other words, there was an element of deceit in the negotiations. Similarly, Kane-Berman draws a parallel with Stalin who hoodwinked World War 2 Allies about his real intent, focusing attention on Russia’s need for security against another invasion from Western Europe, when his actual agenda was to colonise Eastern Europe.
Kane-Berman warns that voters may think they are voting for the ANC’s manifesto but they will be getting something more, the NDR.
Should we be worried? I think so, despite the blandishments of Cyril Ramaphosa, who, in criticising De Klerk, said there is no contradiction between the NDR and the constitution.
Thanks to apartheid, there is an overwhelmingly strong moral argument for socio-economic transformation policies and programmes, but the accompanying state control and interference are economically ruinous.
The deficits this country is running cannot be sustained by implementing outdated socialist ideas, funded by 1,7 million taxpayers who pay 80 percent of income tax. NDR, National Disaster, Really