A WEEKLY newspaper posed a thought-provoking editorial with the question whether SWAPO has abandoned its ideological basis of the working class with the exclusion of peasants and trade union representation from its list of National Assembly members.
It was Karl Marx (1818–1883) who argued that a class is formed when its members achieve class consciousness and solidarity. This largely happens when the members of a class become aware of their exploitation and the conflict with another class. In this regard, Marxist analysis of society identifies two main social groups: Labour, the workers, being paid a wage or salary for their labour time. They have little choice but to work for capital, since they typically have no independent way to survive. Capital, the capitalists, includes anyone who gets their income not from labour as much as from the surplus value they appropriate from the workers who create wealth. Their income is based on their exploitation of the workers.
On his part, Lenin’s revolutionary theory – the belief in the necessity of a violent overthrow of capitalism through a revolution, to be followed by a dictatorship of the proletariat and the need for a vanguard party to lead the proletariat in this effort – developed into a highly influential ideology. Lenin argued that it was crucial to the establishment of the “hegemony of the proletariat” that the urban proletariat retain an ongoing alliance with the rural peasants in order to retain national leadership and that the expertise of the former capitalists be utilised, by forcing them to effectively manage state industries.
Accordingly, it was agreed that the conquest of political power is not possible unless the working class and its party gain the national leadership through being recognised as the political leader of the nation.
The revolution will begin with national and democratic demands such as national independence or land for the peasants. I therefore always maintained that our National Liberation Struggle was started by the working class in Cape Town, South Africa, and in industrial towns such as Windhoek, Tsumeb and Walvis Bay to end the contract labour system, supported by the peasants and intellectuals when the workers linked the struggle at the workplace with the broader struggle for political independence.
As was the case for the struggle against apartheid colonialism, our nation building project of a democratic society is a conscious construct, dependent on conscious action and taking place in global and national conditions that are not of our choosing. As such, we have to master the science and art of assessing the objective conditions and subjective factors that, together, provide opportunities and threats that render particular preferred actions possible. More specifically, we must understand the terrain on which we need to undertake our ‘Second phase of the struggle for economic independence’ in terms of: What are the domestic balances of forces today? Who are the motive forces that must drive this phase? What are their strengths and weaknesses? What other forces in society should we mobilise, and how do we build national consensus around our national vision? What is the global context in which we operate and what opportunities and threats do this context present?
Our strategy and tactics should articulate the two imperatives that inform our approach to the forces for change. The first is the responsibility of the political parties in general and the ruling party in particular, to mobilise all Namibians towards the ongoing transformation of the country.
The second is recognition that there are national and social forces within the country that objectively stand to gain from transformation, and therefore should constitute the motive or driving forces for change. At any point in time the ruling party has to unite the nation, as well as lead the motive forces. This is the major reason for its conscious decision to remain as a liberation movement that also contests elections as a registered political party.
Indeed, there are two features of a liberation movement that are critical, interlinked and inseparable. The first is a core organisation with a progressive political line that it continuously refines as the terrain of struggle changes with organisational capacity and processes to pursue the revolution in the various fronts it identifies. This core must include among its ranks the best from among the motive forces it seeks to represent, and wherever they find themselves act as custodians of the principles of fundamental social change, winning respect among their peers and society at large through their exemplary conduct.
The second feature is the activism of this core organisation among the motive forces and in society in general. This core must mobilise, organise and educate the motive forces and have a presence in all of their sectoral formations. It must conscientise them as to how their sectoral issues and concerns are linked to the broader tasks of transformation and build the broadest possible unity of these progressive forces in pursuit of the national goal in the six pillars of the current phase: the state, the economy, social transformation, the international arena, the ideological terrain, community and social activism.
History is littered with cases when post-liberation, the national liberation movement moves with speed to demobilise its primary constituencies and thus delegitimize any form of protest as the work of “enemy agents”. The danger here is the decline in activism within the broader movement and the demobilisation of society. We must confront the reality that the militancy and anger of the trade union movement sometimes coincides with the shift to the right and the new-found love for neoliberal policies. Such allegiance to neoliberal ideology is evidenced in the everyday practice of the commodification of basic needs, through prepaid electricity and water meters, the sale of state assets, fiscal and monetary policies, etc.
Therefore, some maintain that the trade union movement should define its mandate post-liberation – from one involved in anti-establishment politics against apartheid government to one actively involved in “development activism”. A mobilised population is one of the critical elements in shifting the balance of forces in the people’s movement’s favour and effectively counter-pose imperialist domination and weakening of the movement’s ability to adopt a radical economic programme in the service of the population. In this respect, even when workers and members of the communities engage in protests, they do so as a way of communicating with the people’s government so that it can rapidly address their aspirations, concerns and frustrations.
As a country, we are approaching 25 years, a quarter of a century of freedom. During the past 24 years, we have fundamentally transformed the political landscape of this country, and laid the foundations for progressively meeting basic needs. However, there is also widespread consensus – expressed in a variety of ways – that our society faces fundamental challenges that inhibit it from achieving its goal, and growing consensus that this centres on the triangle of poverty, inequality and unemployment.
The majority of our people live in townships and rural areas that are economically depressed and social stratification and inequality within the black community are increasing. The vast majority of poor households remain black, rural and female.
Our strategy and tactics should therefore define the working class as both employed and unemployed, and urban and rural. Their tasks in this 2nd phase of the struggle for economic independence are to advance the struggle for quality jobs and job security; build class and national solidarity among all sectors of workers – casual, informal and unemployed; ensure strategic contribution to the building of the developmental state, including socio-economic development, provision of services and facilitating people’s participation; direct and expand workers’ institutional capital towards national development; engage capital (and the state) in ensuring a national developmental vision that contributes towards thorough socio-economic transformation; build solidarity with all workers to contribute towards national development and social justice; fight patriarchal relations of production and reproduction that continue to oppress women, etc.
In addition, our strategy and tactics should also highlight the importance of the rural poor as part of the working class – mostly the unemployed, landless, involved in survivalist farming, or farm workers. They therefore face the tasks of contributing to defining and implementing agrarian and land reforms, food security and rural development; enhancing struggles for rural workers’ rights, especially farm workers; changing patriarchal relations of production and reproduction that continue to render women second-class citizens; engaging white compatriots to further agrarian and land reforms and rural development.
Furthermore, as part of the motive forces, the middle stratum constitutes a critical resource of the second phase of the struggle. They include the intelligentsia, small business operators and professionals. Their tasks are to use their skills and sectoral location to advance socio-economic transformation; foster progressive intellectual discourse on the values, culture and challenges of our new society; contribute towards equality, human rights and social justice. The middle strata broadly, but the intelligentsia in particular, play an important role in shaping ideas and perceptions in society. Their ongoing engagement, and their deliberate recruitment into the movement, should be part of not only influencing this stratum, but also ensuring a constant flow of fresh and challenging ideas within the party and society.
In sum, the alienation of the working class is not good and will only fuel the speculation that there is an ideological shift to neo-liberalism.
• Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of my employer and this newspaper but solely reflect my personal views as a citizen.