Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:28:13.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Opposition Parties and Democracy in South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2021

Marina Ottaway
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the heydays of African socialism, Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere declared that socialism was a state of mind. It was, it turned out, the state of mind of some intellectuals, but neither of the mass of the population nor of those in a position to turn an ideal into a political and economic system. In the early 1990s, democracy was sweeping through the continent—as the state of mind not only of a few intellectuals but of a larger segment of the population, although by no means all. It was revulsion against the abuses and human rights violations perpetrated by single party and military regimes, against the lack of accountability of leaders and the economic hardship brought about by years of mismanagement on the part of officials seeking first the political kingdom.

Type
Research Article
Information
African Issues , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , Winter 1991 , pp. 15 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © African Studies Association 1991 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Marina Ottaway taught and carried out research at the University of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 1974 to 1977. Later she was an associate professor in the School of International Service at American University and adjunct professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. Her published works on Africa include Soviet and American Influence on the Horn of Africa; Ethiopia: Empire and Revolution; and Afrocommunism, (last two books were co-authored with David Ottaway).

References

Notes

1. A country that attempted to sound out the population on the issue is Mozambique, where the ruling FRELIMO party held dozens of public meetings to discuss the draft of the new multiparty constitution. The discussions revealed widespread opposition to multipartyism as a divisive system. The government nevertheless approved the constitution. See Mozambiquefffile, No. 170, September 1990, p. 4.

2. Klerk, Willem De, F.W. De Klerk: The Man in His Time, Johannesburg, , Jonathan Ball Publishers, 1991, ch. 1 and 4Google Scholar, offers interesting insights on this point. In a discussion with journalists in Cape Town during the opening of parliament ceremonies in February 1991 the president repeated that apartheid was not wrong, it simply had not worked. Minister for Constitutional Development Gerrit Viljoen also stated that “apartheid was a social experiment that was supposed to bring peace, safety and prosperity, but it did not succeed.” The Citizen, May 28, 1991.

3. The strategy is summed up in The Saturday Star, June 8, 1991; and Ottaway, Marina, “South Africa: The Politics of Constitution-Making,” CSIS Africa Notes, No. 124, May 30, 1991 Google Scholar.

4. State President’s Office, “Manifesto for a New South Africa,” February 1, 1991, mimeo.

5. The International Pentecostal Church is a large, although little known African Church, which has never been involved in political activity. De Klerk’s attendance at the inauguration was part of the strategy to woo supposedly conservative blacks. Quote is taken from text of De Klerk’s speech distributed at the ceremony on May 5, 1991.

6. The position of the government has not been set forth on a single document, but can be gleaned from statements made in various occasions by government officials. See also The Star, May 22, 1991.

7. The ANC’s position is in two documents prepared by its constitutional committee and presented to its members for discussion: “A Bill of Rights for a New South Africa,” 1990; and “A Discussion Document on Structures and Principles of a Democratic Constitution for a Democratic South Africa,” April 1991.

8. Charterist organizations were those supporting the principles set forth in the 1955 Freedom Charter. The Charter remained the ANC’s basic platform, hence charterist organizations were aligned with the ANC.

9. The Democratic Party accused the government of funding the homeland parties, for example. The government naturally denied this. In reality, the government funded the homelands, whose chief ministers were heads of the respective parties. Only a system of financial accountability infinitely stronger than the homelands possessed could have prevented government money going to the parties under the circumstances.