Orania as a guiding light in SA’s darkness should be a source of shame for us all

There are few things that can shock South Africans any longer.

We’ve developed a kind of nonsense-fatigue which allows many of life’s problems to simply roll off us like water from a duck’s back.

I mean, Boris Johnson got ousted for having a lockdown party, whereas most of us would be delighted if that was the worst thing our leaders did.

And now, after decades of communist rhetoric, ‘viva’ chants, and pointing fingers towards that Freedom Charter, where have we turned to in our attempts to save the energy sector? Yup. The private sector.

Also Read: At last! Ramaphosa’s load shedding plan more than just hot air

It would have been marvelous if this was done when the whiffs of load shedding started leaking into the air but, you know, there were other national priorities, like boasting about successfully hosting a World Cup for several years after it had ended.

When it comes to granting abilities to the private sector, those Orania-ites are never quite far behind. Yeah, they’re probably not everybody’s cup of brandewyn, but you gotta hand it to them. Those kids work.

The thing is that politically, there is some disgruntlement about the state accommodating a project like Orania.

Also Read: Watch: Orania close to ditching Eskom, SA’s load shedding struggles

You’d think then that, politically, it would make sense to avoid creating situations where Orania comes to the rescue of its neighbouring hoods. You’d think that with years, no, decades to inherit a functional electric system and upgrade it for the masses, supported by an entire country’s GDP, one would have done at least something impactful.

Alas, this is not the case.

Sure. It’s a great idea to open the grid up for private producers. A year ago, I even suggested the idea in this very column, likening the functionality to that of how NASA is using its existing infrastructure to empower SpaceX and other private space companies.

The difference between the two is that NASA stepped in when it was still on top. It punted itself as the one to empower private industry.

Eskom… well, that’s somewhat the opposite story.

That doesn’t mean that the effect will be any different. At the end of the day, encouraging private producers will lead to more energy and that’s a good thing. We can have a debate later about whether the competitive element will keep prices down.

The why is the vital part of this story, because it’s telling.

It tells of a state’s failure to provide despite having more resources than any independent producer.

It tells of a state’s reliance on a private sector, not because that’s the best course to follow, but because it’s the only course they have left to try.

It tells of an incapacity of organisational skills which has to resort to infrastructure that was built in the 1970s to try and maintain some relevance on the national stage.

Again, at the end of the day, it means we’ll have more energy security, or at least one hopes.

That can only be a good thing. The story people want to avoid looking at is how we got here and why it took so long.

To you and me, the political ramifications of having Orania producing energy for its neighbouring towns is all good and well and we can get on with our days. To those stuck in a 1980s mentality, this policy may end up hurting on a pretty emotional level.

It’s bad enough to have to admit the failings of the people you used your agency to put into power in an effort to give you a better life. It may be scarring to have to admit that the only reason your lights are on is because of the people who won’t let you live with them.

The private sector is great and we should cheer this move, though we should also be conscious of what the implications are.