Professor Graham Harrison
University of Sheffield

 

At Nelson Mandela’s national memorial, ANC Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa and Barack Obama hailed Nelson Mandela as a ‘founding father’. This is a powerful tribute to a great man. Ramaphosa was referencing Mandela’s determination only to negotiate when the apartheid National Party agreed to non racial elections for a unitary government; his ability to embody a historic moment of racial reconciliation; and the dignified way in which he maintained himself during his presidency. This is why Mandela presided over a largely non-violent democratic transition embedded in a new constitution and elections in 1994. All of these traits lend to Mandela an image not simply as a head of state or political leader, but also as a ideal of what political leadership should be.

Obama, contrastingly, did what many politicians have done since Mandela’s death, which might be described as virtue by analogy: his struggle was our struggle, he encapsulated a spirit that we all aspire to, Mandela speaks to us all. In particular Obama associated the United States’ constitutional history with that of South Africa’s non-racial constitution: ‘Like America’s founding fathers, he would erect a constitutional order to preserve freedom for future generations’. Of course, America’s Founding Fathers would hardly have agreed with Mandela’s vision of a ‘rainbow nation’; in fact most would not have listened to him as a citizen or countryman. But, the point of having founding fathers is not respect for historical accuracy. What matters is effective myth building. Myths of origin are part of the DNA of so many modern state and nation building projects, whether expressed through the imagery of founding fathers, constitutional assemblies, monarchies, cultural-ethnic ancestor/heroes, or religious texts and places of worship. In this sense, Obama and especially Ramaphosa’s evocation of Mandela as South Africa’s founding father repays some reflection. The political work of his memorialisation offers a rough metric of the current progress of South Africa’s non-racial national  project.

Calling Mandela a founding father in South Africa’s troubled times highlights how badly this country needs strong and stable historical narratives and political ideals. Currently, South Africa suffers from income inequality that might be greater than it was at the end of apartheid. This is evident in its political economy: a lack of housing and basic services, perhaps a quarter of people living on less that $1.25 a day, perhaps 40% of the working population either unemployed or insecurely employed. Historically-entrenched and still significantly racialised inequalities in property and incomes remain. Crime is a massive problem, as is sexual violence, and HIV/AIDS. Issues concerning corruption, xenophobia, the creation of an ANC party-state, the extent to which a ‘black bourgeoisie’ can drive a more inclusive development project have generated many political tensions and battles in South Africa’s highly politicised society. And, above and within all of this, the South African economy remains heavily dominated by international capital and reliant on a small group of mineral and agricultural exports.

Little surprise, then, that South African nation-building – and aspiration that seemed so possible when Mandela was sworn in – now seems to take the form of a fairly weak mantra: ‘we have made some progress, but patience is required…’ or even worse, ‘there is no alternative’. This is not the stuff of strong national purpose, nor is it evocative of the myriad and virile political streams of socialism and social democracy that characterised the struggle for South Africa in the 1970s and 80s. And, before we are entirely socialised into a liberal airbrushing of history, it is worth remembering that, for all of the personal integrity of Nelson Mandela and for all of the concerted struggles of anti apartheid movements around the world, it was the civic associations, labour unions, ANC branches, and other popular organisations that made apartheid unsustainable both politically and economically.

Mandela’s passing and the State Memorial taking place today seems to express the anxieties of South Africa’s progress as each speaker endeavours to connect Mandela’s remarkable image of political virtue with something grander and aspirational for the country. One aspiration shared by all of the South African speakers was to memorialise Mandela, make myths from his history, and revitalise the inclusive national project.

Amongst the speakers, those who participated in the struggle against apartheid shout amandla! (power) and viva! (long live), the core vocabulary not only of resistance against apartheid but also of political radicalism: of socialism, national redistribution, the overthrow of apartheid as a step towards ambitious social justice. As the current President’s image was shown on the big screens, and as he stepped up to the podium, there was a considerable amount of booing. But, there were also cheers, and Zuma was the only person to give a balanced narrative about the extent to which apartheid’s devastation was far greater than Mandela’s incarceration. Indeed, anyone born in the 1980s or after, listening to the international mass media narratives would be forgiven for thinking that apartheid was a brief phase in South Africa’s history, defined by one man’s imprisonment and also seemingly benefitting no-one in particular. For all of his laboured delivery, Zuma did remind those watching of the difficulties of forgiving without retrospectively trivialising aparthied’s history and legacy. But, as the crowd became quieter and the rain continued one could almost imagine this as a national lament rather than a revitalisation.

The fact is that South Africa’s transition to a non-racial democracy has not addressed the powerful historical legacies of centuries of racism and dispossession. To speak of ‘the nation’ in the South African context is to speak aspirationally rather than of a robust working fiction. After nearly twenty years, poverty and inequality remain as severe social blights, racism remains even if implicit or coded, the South African economy’s periods of growth have not powered a process of socially-beneficial development. So, the bigger question – and the reason why Mandela’s memorialisation has been both so prolific and tense – is: founding father of what?