DEAL OR NO DEAL
The majority of South Africans are becoming convinced now more than ever that only violence will resolve their dire and hopeless living conditions as the band-aid is coming off to reveal the deep and gory wound that was left untreated since 1994. To majority of black South African this is would was inflicted by the horrors of living under apartheid while it was treated by the ANC/NP leadership through a negotiated settlement which carried the deal breaker/maker condition. This single condition was the one that seemed to appease both parties by committing that those who are wounded will be treated by their perpetrators provided that we all start on a clean slate. Now hold on…before you think that I’m making this up. The proviso of the ‘Sunset Clause’ by Joe Slovo during the CODESA II became the “breakthrough” suggesting that all parties should take part in the new government at least for a few years until the next election essentially meaning “business as usual” However, 20 years down the age of democracy South Africans have realized that it has remain “business as usual” for far too long while the blacks continue to live as second class citizens in a country where they are a majority.
VIOLENT CIVIL PROTESTS
While it is true that the many civil protests around the country have lost their civility in them, due to their violent nature, as a result they have been reduced to being called “service delivery protests”. These mass protests are symptomatic to their fall out of that negotiated settlement of 1994. Black South Africans have realized that the deal which was signed on their behalf was hollow, bearing no tangible results that would help to advance them to escape the life of poverty in their masses. It was a deal structured to benefits the elite and their decedents within the ANC and its associates, while guaranteeing that the whites’ living condition are not impaired by rather continue to thrive from generation to generation.
In an even where a deal is breached by either party in an agreement, it is only natural to look for someone to blame. Some might be tempted to blame the beneficiaries (aka protesters) or perhaps the breach was on the part of the buyers (aka the whites) or the sellers (aka the ANC government). This is put categorically so because the ANC government did not read the fine print on the contract which is also so fundamental to the deal. This fine print explained in detail that although there is a commitment towards political freedom, the concessions pertaining to economic freedom cannot be guaranteed. The Whites could also be to blame because they have also breached the condition which held them responsible to “empower” the beneficiaries of the deal to get to a state of self-sustenance. The only one can put on the black majority (beneficiaries) on this deal was that they HOPED too much, HOPE that this deal was made in good faith.
When a deal has clearly been breached and the violators have been identified, the justifiable recourse to take is to punish the parties in breach. In this particular situation one would be tempted to revolt violently and destroy everything as we have observed with the “service delivery protests”. However, rational would tell you to act decisively in taking corrective measures by if found at fault…. 1. Punish the ANC government by democratically removing them from power. ….2. Punish the White resistors by seeking repatriation for any wrong doing on their part …..3. Punish the beneficiaries by enforcing the justice.
Deals are made and broken all the time. Through generations the founding beliefs and intension are faded away as conditions change. If there is anything certain within these deals thou, is justice. Therefore, as long as the aim is to seek justice then there will always be an opportunity to make another deal.