DA's ‘Kool-Aid' moment risks GNU stability
In 1978, Jim Jones of the People's Temple in Guyana led 900 members of his church to commit mass suicide by drinking Kool-Aid laced with cyanide.
This act birthed the phrase, 'don't drink your own Kool-Aid', which warns people against the dangers of exaggerated self-belief, or trusting their own hype, uncritically so.
The DA showed that it is willing to drink its own Kool-Aid.
On the one-year anniversary of the day that President Cyril Ramaphosa announced the government of national unity (GNU) Cabinet, the party decided to show all and sundry its exaggerated sense of belief in its own hype.
Perhaps it forgot the number of commentators who wrote obituaries detailing how long the coalition government would last.
The formation of the GNU was characterised by a screaming match between the secretary-general of the ANC, Fikile Mbalula, and the federal chair of the DA, Helen Zille.
ALSO READ: Business Leadership CEO expresses worry about recent GNU tensions
The general consensus was that the union had a sell-by date and that this date would be considerably shorter than the five years mandated by the constitution.
This past week, the DA marked this anniversary by threatening its partner in government with, among other things, tabling a motion of no confidence in the president.
What had the president done that warranted the issuing of the 48-hour do-this-or-else threat? He had exercised his prerogative by firing the DA's deputy minister of trade and industry Andrew Whitfield.
Initially, the president did not give reasons for firing Whitfield, but was forced by the DA's loud protestations to reveal the process and reasons that made him fire him.
In a nutshell, a Cabinet meeting this year decided no member of the executive was to travel to the United States for a certain period, given the state of US-SA relations.
That is in addition to the standing rule that all members of the executive must always seek the permission of the president to travel anywhere outside South Africa.
ALSO READ: Ramaphosa acted 'justifiably' in removing Whitfield, says SACP
Whitfield defied this and Ramaphosa fired him.
Ramaphosa has since revealed that he communicated his decision to the DA leader and agriculture minister in his Cabinet, John Steenhuisen, on his intention to fire Whitfield and additionally asked him and his party to forward him the name of their chosen replacement.
What did the DA do?
Shout from the mountaintops about how inconsistent the president was because there are ministers in his Cabinet who have done far worse, but he has not fired them.
And, for good measure, they added the 48-hour deadline by which the president had to fire these other ministers, or face unspecified consequences.
Anyone would have told the DA for free that the president would call them out on their bluff because to accede to their demands would have shown how weak a president he is, to not only his opponents, but to his detractors in his own party.
ALSO READ: DA vows to stay in GNU to 'fight corruption', threatens motion against Ramaphosa
Why the DA would issue such a threat knowing if it was not met it would result in its own embarrassment is beyond comprehension.
The hypocrisy of the demand that the president fire other ministers because they, too, are guilty must have escaped the DA's think-tank because that in itself is an admission of how wrong Whitfield was to defy a Cabinet instruction.
Are David Mahlobo and Nobuhle Nkabane – the other ministers the DA demanded that Ramaphosa must fire – guilty as they allege?
Most definitely.
But the DA's exaggerated belief in its own hype will have the unintended consequence of imploding the GNU if it continues down this road.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
14 minutes ago
- The Citizen
SACP sticks to its guns on going it alone in polls
The SACP says corruption, privatisation, and governance decay forced its move to contest elections independently. Supporters of the South African Communist Party march through Braamfontein against gender-based violence, 21 August 2022. Picture: Michel Bega Amid swelling criticism from the ANC leadership, the South African Communist Party (SACP) will not reverse its decision to participate independently in the forthcoming local government elections, it says. The party, which has been in a long-term alliance with the ANC and Congress of SA Trade Unions, believes contesting for state power is necessary in light of the ANC's continued implementation of the neoliberal agenda. The party described its decision as a 'tactical shift in our electoral strategy', saying it realised that, over time, the gains of millions of people had increasingly been undermined by the neoliberal policies of the ANC. Tactical shift in SACP's electoral strategy The party cited corporate class capture of key state positions or sections by office bearers, public representatives, public sector officials and board members in public entities, among others. It objected to outsourcing or privatisation of public sector functions, abuse of state tenders, corruption, governance decay and failure to serve the people in favour of public interests. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa acted 'justifiably' in removing Whitfield, says SACP 'A direct electoral contest is not a break from our strategic goals but a tactical reconfiguration of our electoral strategy,' the party said. It noted that 'forming part of the alliance was never meant to compromise the SACP's independence and mission of implementing the national democratic revolution and socialism. 'All alliance partners are independent formations – and none is part of the alliance to postpone or compromise its independence and historical mission. Shared strategic objectives 'We have come together as allies to pursue our shared strategic objectives,' the party said. Political analyst George Tsibani said the tone of the SACP statement diverged from its characteristic ideology and tone. ALSO READ: SACP plans solo run in 2026 as ANC faces new threat 'A quintessential Marxist-Leninist organisation, the SACP's foundational principles revolve around class struggle and the pivotal role of the working class in achieving socialism. The text in question lacks this distinct tone,' Tsibani said. He said the party was divorcing itself from its main task in the national democratic revolution. The SACP's primary focus areas encompass gender-based violence, community mobilisation and radical policy changes. In stark contrast, the given text concentrates on regime change, black fashionable political parties and the role of the DA, he added. Voting for the SACP would be tantamount to donating votes to the DA. Vote for regime change 'A vote for the SACP is a vote for regime change,' Tsibani said. The party is coming under attack from the ANC top brass for the decision it formalised at its special national congress last year. ALSO READ: SACP's solo election run won't hurt ANC, analyst says Among critics was ANC national chair Gwede Mantashe, a former SACP national chair. He said by contesting the election separately, the party had deviated from the 'black republic thesis' that stated there would not be socialism in SA while the black majority were still under oppression. 'Black republic thesis' He said it was a common view of all SACP leaders that the party must not neglect the ANC's mass base. If the party moved away from that mass base, it would be giving away its own advantage. 'The SACP must be located in the mass base, the ANC, and influence it while theorising on the revolution framework and while we resolve our differences.'
The Citizen
29 minutes ago
- The Citizen
The DA must decide to stay in GNU or step aside
The DA faces a credibility crisis in the GNU, behaving more like an opposition party than a governing partner. DA leaders John Steenhuisen and federal chair Helen Zille brief the media on the party's future as a GNU partner in Cape Town last weekend. Picture: Gallo Images/Per-Anders Pettersson The government of national unity (GNU) has put the DA in a predicament. The party finds itself in a growing credibility crisis – torn between wielding real power and preserving its opposition identity. Last Wednesday's axing of DA deputy minister of trade, industry and competition Andrew Whitfield has raised the constant question of whether the party can truly govern if it cannot commit? This is worsened by the fact that the DA couldn't follow through on its '48 hours or else…' ultimatum to President Cyril Ramaphosa after the firing of Whitfield. Whitfield was dismissed following his unsanctioned trip to the US – a move reportedly made without executive approval. The DA insists proper channels were followed, but the Presidency maintains there was a clear breach of protocol. While the details of the incident may seem procedural, the fallout reveals a much deeper problem: the DA behaves less like a party in government and more like one eternally in opposition. Instead of rallying to resolve the dispute internally, the DA responded by withdrawing from the National Dialogue, issuing sharp rebukes and hinting at broader political consequences. The party's tone remains adversarial – more befitting a faction trying to hold government to account than one trying to shape its direction from within. This division raises serious concerns about the DA's role in the GNU. ALSO READ: No party will pull out of the GNU, experts say During Saturday's media briefing – which turned out to be a damp squib as no divorce papers were served as expected – it became clear the DA was like someone who wants the benefits of a marriage, but won't commit. This person also wants to stay in the marriage for the sake of the children and prying relatives (in the DA's case, for the sake of South Africans and business); so that they can keep an eye on the abusive and cheating spouse (in this case, the 'corrupt' ANC). But Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni made it plain that DA ministers, while appointed from party ranks, serve the national executive – not their political party. Public trust depends on this very fact. When DA ministers serve as party spokespersons, denouncing government policies they are constitutionally bound to implement, they damage their credibility and that of the GNU. The party does not agree with the national budget vote and it is currently vowing to vote against budgets of 'corruption-accused ANC ministers' – including Human Settlements Minister Thembi Simelane and Higher Education and Training Minister Nobuhle Nkabane. And, one wonders, if it is really interested in governing, rather than cheap politicking, why doesn't it argue its differences in Cabinet meetings instead of hanging its dirty laundry out in public? Yet, the DA remains steadfast in the GNU. Why? The reasons are pragmatic. Being inside government gives the DA access to key levers of power and the ability to influence outcomes from within. Walking away could look like political abandonment, which a party hoping to grow its national support can ill afford. ALSO READ: GNU may be imperfect, but it's necessary There's also the matter of political foresight: vacating its seats may usher in ideologically incompatible alliances among other parties. This could potentially push the country into a coalition they would not appreciate. The ministerial pay and perks are also hard for them to part with. However, staying in government cannot be a halfway effort. It comes with responsibility: compromise, cooperation and prioritising the national interest over party interests. By participating in the GNU, the DA is part of the government. That must mean more than title and salary – it must reflect in conduct, language and decision-making. It is not enough to champion clean governance, while undermining collective decisions behind closed doors. Nor is it sustainable to simultaneously govern and attack the institution it belongs to. South Africans deserve cohesion and progress, not political grandstanding disguised as principle. If the DA wishes to be in government, it must start acting like it. Otherwise, it may be time to step back and resume its traditional role – outside the halls of power, free to oppose, critique and campaign, but no longer holding the reins. The DA must decide: lead from within as a collective, or step aside if it doesn't want the Freedom Front Plus to woo its voters. NOW READ: Mbalula dares DA to 'pack its bags' and leave the GNU [VIDEO]
TimesLIVE
an hour ago
- TimesLIVE
Amid wrecking balls like Trump, ANC, here's how organisations can still thrive
With rising global and South African uncertainty, as US President Donald Trump upends global politics, trade and markets, and as the ANC battles to transform from the unilateral decision-making of one-party dominance to collaborative multiparty governance, threatening the life of the country's Government of National Unity, organisations, whether state, private or nonprofit, have to be resilient — able to thrive in adversity, to navigate these shocks and see opportunities in uncertainty...
