On Contradictions at UFH: Who is the foe of the students? by Lindokuhle Mponco

     On Contradictions at UFH: Who is the foe of the students?

 

The first thing we need to understand when we delve into this matter is the keyword contradiction. A contradiction according to the Oxford dictionary is a combination of statements, ideas, or features which are opposed to one another. It further goes on to refer to contradiction being a situation in which inconsistent elements are present. In our case at the University of Fort Hare we can clearly see that we have an environment which is riddled with contradictions which have become an inherent part of the process. The contradictions vary, however, in this Marxist-Leninist analysis we will deal with the primary contradiction as it sets the tone for the secondary contradictions.

 

                                      Historical Development of UFH

 

The University of Fort Hare is an institution of higher learning which was founded in the year 1916 and was then known as the South African Native College. It was initially attached to the University of South Africa before it was associated to Rhodes University and renamed University College of Fort Hare. In 1953, it became part of the Bantu Education system, and became one of the many ‘bush’ colleges that would produce revolutionary stalwarts like the late General Secretary of the South African Communist Party, Chris Hani (he was eventually expelled and graduated at Rhodes University). The University of Fort Hare was in all its intent and purposes created to create a black elite which would be the spreader of pro-bourgeois ideas. James Stewart, a missionary principal of the Lovedale Missionary Institute had suggested this development in the year 1878, however, it was only realised 38 years later.

In 1916, the Colonial Settler population, which at this time was dominated by the British, had fully subordinated the African masses, and had successfully suppressed the Indian settler population. They had started legislatively setting the tone for a capitalist development which would intensify the proletarianization of the African majority, and the descendants of the Indian & Chinese indentured labourers and settlers. The University of Fort Hare makes its appearance in the middle of World War I, and at first glance is seen as a tool to continue the ‘civilisation’ of the African masses. However, what we can see is an institution which was set up to strengthen the hegemony of the capitalist class which was embodied by the Colonial Settler population. The Christian principles of subsidising the fees, and creation of bursary schemes and scholarships were used to attract a large pool of African students. This large pool would then become the new elite which would be the epitome of ‘civilisation’ among the African masses.

The education was Western-style and emphasised British superiority, especially after the victory of World War I. This character remained until the dawn of the apartheid regime which had one sole aim, and that is to turn it into a ‘black university’. The aim of turning it into a ‘black university’ was not to enforce a sense of pride, but rather isolate and alienate African people from the rest of the oppressed ethnicities. The anti-thesis of this development is that every time the State tried to turn the University of Fort Hare into a tool to advance its class interests, which are elitist and serve the capitalist class, the student populace has always resisted such advances. As a result, the University has always produced revolutionary personalities who would go on to shape and shift the revolutionary movement against apartheid & capitalism. This allowed the revolutionary movement to perform its necessary tasks. The continued clash of these forces throughout the period of British colonialism, and Apartheid ultimately led to the 1994 breakthrough moment of temporary rest due to ‘Rainbow Nation’ euphoria.

The ‘Rainbow Nation’ euphoria would reduce the level of strikes to mainly operational issues and the transformational aspect was somewhat shoved to the backseat. This is understandable considering the fact that the ANC and its principals were enjoying popularity, and everything they touched seemed to turn into gold in the eyes of the masses. The ANC-led government post-1994 managed to hold back the anger of the students even though strikes would erupt particularly because of the deformed character and pattern of development during its lifetime. This deformed character was further intensified by the addition of the two campuses in semi-urban and urban areas (Bhisho and the East London Campus). These additions brought the reality of combined and uneven development to the institution. Combined and uneven development became manifest in its most vile character particularly because the issues now differed based on subjective factors, even though the objective reality remained.

The #FeesMustFall epoch was a defining epoch in the Higher Education sector, particularly at the University of Fort Hare. The contradiction of commodified education which was no longer as subsidised as the pre-Bantu Education era made the situation unbearable. To paraphrase Lenin’s words, the rulers couldn’t rule the old way and the subjects couldn’t live the same way. The activism sprung forth due to the intensified contradictions which led to transformational issues taking the primary role, while operational issues took the secondary role even though the two were interlinked to the other. This turn was accompanied by a change in management which coincided with the defeat of the #FeesMustFall. After the #FeesMustFall era of 2015 – 2017, the crisis of GBV became so overt that a GBV policy had to be enacted in 2019 due to student pressure. This once again shows how the students have been the motive force for change throughout the history of the institution.

After the #RegisterOneRegisterAll strike in the beginning of the 2020 academic which was stopped by the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent lockdown, we saw strikes to effect transformational and operational change shift to online platforms and gain some relative strength. It is a pity that after the initial show of strength, the online strike movement has not only ebbed but is at its lowest point in terms of driving awareness and mobilising students. What exists at present is unorganised complaints which are subject to opportunistic vultures who are preying on the dying body of the student.

 

Who is then the enemy?

 

It is then based on this historical development whereby we can clearly see that the historical enemy of the students at the University of Fort Hare or any other university for that matter is the State. However, we must remember universities are the cultural expression of the State. Therefore, the State indirectly uses the management as its instrument to carry out the class interests of the dominant class. The dominant class in this context is a social group with one common interest, and that is to maximise profits at all costs. This dominant class is known as the Bourgeoisie, or the Capitalist class which owns the means of producing the necessary goods and services we need to reproduce and live as humans. This dominant class is the first to demand for police officers to use force to suppress student strikes. The management before it can call the police exhausts the use of private security. The owners of these hired armed men accumulate a profit for the continued protection of ‘public property’ which ultimately benefits the owners of the means of production more than they do those who are subjected to use these properties. As revolutionaries we should stand against any damage to property whether it belongs to all or to the capitalist. Our aim in our struggle against capitalism is not to destroy the property of capitalists, but to expropriate it and place it under democratic workers’ control and management. We can not subject ourselves into owning the ashes of property that could be used to eliminate the poverty, inequality, and exploitation that exists in our society!

 The Capitalist class uses the media to put the management under pressure. The management due to this pressure and its purpose have no option but to manage the contradictions and these antagonistic clashes through the deployment of force. The violence of the State, and ultimately the Capitalist class is not released because students are burning property that can help them, but mainly because the burning of this property is an attack and a declaration of war to the Capitalist class, and its principal agent, the State. The State is led by the party which wins elections, and has no problem bowing down to the demands of the Capitalist class. From this we can see that the response of the State is the response of the Capitalist class against an attack on its interests, the management becomes the implementing agent, and therefore assumes and embodies this contradiction particularly because it is the ambassador of the State, and ultimately the Capitalist class. The management becomes a primary contradiction not because they are the primary source of the other contradictions that grip the University, but because they embody the interests of those that benefit from these contradictions who are in turn the real source of these contradictions, the State and ultimately the Capitalist class. The workers also suffer in this process particularly because of this, due to how these contradictions lead to staff shortages, outsourcing which leads to exploitative wages being paid to low-level workers, the emphasis of quantity leads to lower level of quality of work, and corruption. The management does all it can to maintain order, produce outcomes, and continue to provide the raw resources which make a profit for the Capitalist class, human labour, and creativity.

It is through open confrontation with the management whereby students can begin the transformative process of turning the University of Fort Hare into a bastion of excellence, and a producer of high-level graduates that will contribute decisively to the development of the productive forces, and ultimately society. The confrontation will trigger a greater response by the State, which must trigger a counter response of introducing the Working class into the revolutionary arena. When the workers are involved, the confrontation will transform into a broader class confrontation which will either have revolutionary or reactionary outcomes.

 

The scourge of GBV #JusticeForNosicelo by Lindokuhle Mponco

                                              The Scourge of GBV #JusticeForNosicelo

                                                                    by

                                                        Lindokuhle Mponco

The scourge of GBV in South Africa continues to rip communities apart. The latest incident that occurred keeps proving that until we deal with patriarchy and toxic masculinity, we will not have a GBV free society. Of course it is very important to note that patriarchy and toxic masculinity are not necessarily a capitalist feature even though we have come to recognise that capitalism has intensified and strengthened it. Anything that promotes and justifies exploitation has been used to advance the growth of capitalism including customary law.

The brutal murder of our sister Nosicelo Mtebeni, who was a final year LLB student has not only served as a reminder but keeps on reminding us that the scourge of gender based violence still exists and will not go away without proper action. As students from different class backgrounds we united against the murder of the late UCT student Uyinene Mrwetyana after hearing about the horrific death she suffered at the hands of another man who felt entitled to her affection. Students from across the country joined hands to speak up and stand up against another GBV murder which continues to illustrate the toxic character of patriarchy. We cannot disassociate this behaviour from patriarchy, which then gives birth to toxic masculinity because such are intertwined like a shoe and its laces. The GBV scourge is older than the dawn of capitalism in South Africa, however, we have to deal with African Nationalists who romanticise the era before capitalism as if it was paradise.

The teachings that continue to exist in the psyche of men in South Africa date back to the pre-colonial era where men were taught to be the protectors of women because they are the 'weaker' sex. However, the contradiction is that traditional African society in South Africa referred to a woman as 'Imbokodo'. 'Imbokodo' is a hard and immovable rock which was meant to denote that women are an immovable force and are therefore hard to break. This figure of speech might have been used during the Apartheid era to describe the strength and resilience of women, however, it has become a double edged sword in the hands of patriarchs who view women as a literal mbokodo. The saying has not only dehumanised women overtime, but has also turned them into punching bags. This saying is directly linked to when women get married and are told to 'nyamezela' or 'bekezela' because marriage is a tough journey where happiness comes and goes. It is a reality that these words are used to encourage women to stay in abusive relationships even when the abused woman wants to leave this death trap. We must dialectically analyse the role culture plays in perpetuating GBV and start to assess whether our respective cultures are progressive when it comes to combating GBV. 

It is a reality that South Africa is a rape capital in the world, with 66 196 reported incidents and a rate of 132.40 incidents per 100 000 people according to the World Population Review. This is the highest in the world! The World Population Review also ranked South Africa 10th in the overall murder rates at 32.9 murders per 100 000 people, while Femicide statistics sit at 9.5 per 100 000 people according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) with South Africa being the leader of the pack. This comes at the back of the high rate of unreported cases and incidents, meaning that there are more women that suffer in silence, and more women that get killed by their so called loved ones. The statistics might not show everything but they give us a glimpse of the scourge we are dealing with. It is unfortunate that 70% of the people that commit these dastardly acts are people that are known to the victims, this ultimately meaning that there is a 70% chance of a women being killed or raped, or even going through both at the hands of someone they know. 

As a man, I bow my head in shame and sorrow because I know that most of these cases are perpetrated by men. The situation is so bad that even men fear men! Men has become the prime enemy of humanity particularly because of the notion that they are superior and have the inherent right to oppress and dehumanise whoever they can dehumanise. Men are at the centre of almost every GBV case particularly because they believe they have the divine right to do as they will in this world. These so-called rights stem from religious practices and cultural practices that affirm the undue rights of men to dictate the lives of women. It is alleged that this non-entity of a human brutally murdered Nosicelo because he suspected that she was cheating. That excuse is a lame excuse which has unfortunately led to many a deaths. It stems from the toxic masculine idea that a woman cannot cheat on a man, while a man cheating on a woman is understandable. It is these cultural beliefs that lead us to this dark path of men killing women based on unfounded suspicions. Even if the allegation is true it still doesn't justify killing a human.

The patriarchy which continues to grip contemporary South Africa is a breeding ground for toxic masculinity which manifests itself in GBV incidents such as this tragic incident which brought an abrupt end to a promising life. We must go beyond social media slogans and hashtags and start moving towards the space of rolling mass action. The GBV epidemic is symptom of a parasitic State which feeds the capitalist machine through the blood of innocent women, whose potential is dimmed by toxic tendencies of men who have become willing weapons in the hands of the racist, capitalist and patriarchal machine that continues to destroy the fabric of our society.

On building a revolutionary organisation Part One by Lindokuhle Mponco

 

                    On building a revolutionary organisation pt. 1

                                                              by

                                              Lindokuhle Mponco

 

We always hear, see, or even read this word organisation but have we ever taken the time to understand what the word organisation means? The first thing that comes to mind when you think of the word organisation is essentially the condition of a concrete object. Organisation is essentially the state of readiness which comes from awareness. This awareness comes from a realisation that to reach maximum output, one needs to collectivise the necessary resources to achieve this aim. This in a nutshell is what the word organisation means.

Now adding revolutionary to the mix immediately shifts it to another level and assigns a task to that organisation. An organisation that espouses and claims to be revolutionary must be measured by that standard, and first we must understand the meaning of the word revolutionary. Revolutionary technically means a full circle movement. However, in political terms it means the abrupt termination of the way of doing things to usher in a new way of doing things (Lenin, 1917). This way of doing things has to be organised, and as such it is why we refer to it as an order. The Old Order immediately implies the old way of organising oneself, or society, while the New Order immediately implies the new way of organising oneself, or society (Lenin, 1917). In essence, a revolutionary organisation is a collective of individuals that seek to establish a new way of doing things. Their method of ushering in this new way of doing things is characterised by terminating the old way of doing things abruptly. As such, this abrupt termination is often accompanied by blood, sweat, and tears due to how this conflict is built up and ultimately unfolds (Lenin, 1917).

The termination of the old way of doing things means that the new way of doing things must usher in a group of individuals who will organise society on this basis, and they cannot accomplish this task without being organised into one body, or structure (Lenin, 1917). From this we can deduce that to establish a new way of doing things and ultimately establish a new society means there must be an organisation (Lenin, What is to be done?, 1902).  A new way of doing things just does not pop out of nowhere, it must emerge from somewhere because everything has a starting point. This evolutionary process happens due to two different forces, which in most cases in human history are inherently contradictory to each other due to having different interests (Marx K. &., 1848). For an order to exist one must subject the other one to the other, and from there on the production of ideas, and accumulation of resources will mostly benefit those that run the order and have subjected the other force to their rule. These forces are known as classes, and it is from this experience that we see that human history is a product of class struggle (Marx K. &., 1848). Marx & Engels are not the only thinkers that have come to this conclusion, British Sociologist Max Weber also comes to this conclusion too. It is from these conclusions that we realise that the duty of every subject class is to collectivise its resources with the sole aim of abruptly terminating the old way of doing things to establish the new way of doing things (Lenin, 1917). Lenin goes on to further say that the need to terminate the old way of doing things stems from the changing material conditions (Lenin, 1917). The material conditions change because the means of producing the necessary resources to reproduce life have stagnated, and this stagnancy creates a degeneration of the system used to do things (Marx K. &., 1848).

The stagnancy leads to decreasing living standards, and further drives the subject class downwards. This push down leads to a response of the subject class either being in tow with the decline, or a resistance which is characterised by the subject class rejecting the way of doing things, and abruptly terminating them to usher in a new way of doing things, fit for the material conditions (Marx K. &., 1848). This is then called a revolution, and in our experience as humans we have come to know that organisation is a core element of any revolution, and it is organisations that carry out revolutions. In essence, there is no spontaneous revolution, and all revolutions are driven by ideas of the dominant organisation within the subject class (Trotsky, 1907). These ideas emerge because of the experience of the system by the subject class. This experience of constant conflict and clashes with the ruling class leads to a realisation that for one to enjoy the same benefits in this society, one must reshape this society to create an entirely new society which will elevate those at the bottom at the ultimate expense of those at the top (Marx K. &., 1848).

Due to this, the need to organise this group of diverse individuals who have a common interest, and a common grievance leads to these individuals to formulate ideas and theories which will be applied to overcome this dominant/ruling class. As such, an organisation is formed to not only carry out these ideas but to educate the rest of the subject class with the aim of liberating them from the yoke of the ruling class (Lenin, What is to be done?, 1902). The organisation either from the onset is geared towards abruptly terminating the old way of doing things to usher in the new way of doing things or is geared towards gradually revising the old way of doing things. The revision has been proven time and time again to be a futile exercise due the fact that all systems, or rather way of doing things come and go based on the changing material conditions (Marx K. &., 1848). From the old society, we see the germs of the new society and it is these germs that grow to a point whereby they create a new organism with characteristics of the old society but at the same time a wholly new organism with the germs of the new society (Marx K. , 1871). The need to create this new society means that the subject class must be equally organised if not more organised than the ruling class. In one of his articles, Lenin once said a slogan of winning over the army, and arming the people was a positive slogan in the struggle against despotism and capitalism due to how it practically organised the subject class and gave them an advantage when it comes to abruptly terminating the old way of doing things. Once again, an organisation must exist for these slogans to exist, and a revolutionary organisation serves that purpose of producing ideas, spreading them, and applying them to liberate the subject class by using the subject class itself (Lenin, The State and Revolution, 1917).

A revolutionary organisation must identify the motive forces, or rather the driving forces of this struggle against the old way of doing things. Once they have identified these forces, they then must collectivise their struggles into one programme which will speak to the general overthrow of the old way of doing things to usher in the new way of doing things. Once they have been collectivised it is automatic that they will operate under one banner, which represents the common interests of the subject class. The motive forces, or rather the driving forces of this struggle must always be trained and equipped for this task so that they do not degenerate, and usher in the era of caricatures and distorted new ways of doing things. It is the duty of the individuals who study, analyse, and understand these ideas and theories to ensure that the essence of these ideas and theories do not die out, but are constantly developed and shaped to fit the material conditions. Should these ideas and theories exhaust their historical necessity, it is bound to happen that their death will usher in new ideas and theories to advance the struggle of the subject class, and as such a revolutionary organisation must always anticipate such due to its inherent character of always being ready to terminate abruptly the old way of doing things (Marx K. &., 1848). However, time is a process which dialectically turns the revolutionary organisation of today to an oppressor organisation of tomorrow, and such a contradiction can only be resolved through the termination of a class-based society and the creation of a classless society (Marx K. &., 1848).

It is on this basis that we can begin this gigantic process of building a revolutionary organisation which will usher in a society whereby the old way of doing things is a distant memory, and the new way of doing things is a reality. Once we understand why a revolutionary organisation exists, the conditions that lead to its existence, and the ideas and theories that sustain the revolutionary organisation for it to abruptly terminate the old way of doing things, to usher in the new way of doing things, then the task of building a revolutionary organisation will be much easier.

 

7 June 2021

East London, South Africa  

 

 

 

 

 

The Poverty of Ideas by Lindokuhle Mponco

 

                                The Poverty of Ideas in Student Politics

                                                              Authored by

                                                  Lindokuhle Mponco

 

The students in South African institutions of higher learning have shown massive revolutionary potential. When it comes to mobilising, they have mirrored the days of the ‘80s when the then leader of the ANC, O.R Tambo raised a clarion call to make South Africa ungovernable  due to an Apartheid regime which was not only hell bent on killing black people for show, but a regime which was hell bent on ensuring that the education system indoctrinates the masses with White Supremacist and Capitalist ideas. This was not the only reason, the other reason was the suppression of Communist ideas and theory. However, the lack of ideas has led to the student movement facing a blind alley every time they go on the offensive.

One might ask themselves what is the cause of this? The answer to this question was answered by the leader of the Bolshevik party, Vladimir Lenin. He said, “There is no revolutionary movement without theory” (Lenin, 1902). This was articulated in his classic book, What is to be done? Lenin stressed this point because during the time preceding the 1905 Russian uprising many of the RSDLP cadres believed in the revisionist tendency of peaceful cooperation with the bosses, consistent with the ideas of leading revisionist Eduard Bernstein. The revisionist camp was also very open about their disdain for theory, due to the perception that theory is too abstract, if not impractical. This also highlighted the fact that the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) was filled with opportunists, and revisionists.

Now we can parallel this same tendency with the tendency that not only dominates South African political discourse and practice, but also dominates the student movement’s character. This disdain for theory came about due to the co-opting of student organisations that were theoretically grounded. The co-opting of these student organisations was facilitated by their fraternal allies, and eventually the capitalist class. SASCO is a prime example of this, and as a result the student movement has not only grown weaker in character, but also confused in terms of ideology. This creates a situation whereby the predominant ideas are reactionary, if not reformist. This tendency to over emphasise practice over theory has led to a situation whereby students fight the state only to succumb to the state.

The constant back and forth proves what Rosa Luxemburg had said to Bernstein from 1898 – 1899, that this system cannot be reformed, it must be overthrown (Luxemburg, 1899). If  SASCO and many other student organisations that claim to have revolutionary traditions had taught this to the students, the students would have drawn the necessary conclusion to connect their struggle with the working class, and the peasantry. The entry of the EFFSC has been a welcome entry into the student movement due to the revolutionary character of the said organisation. The EFFSC has not only stopped there but it has also emphasised the Leninist adage of no revolutionary movement without theory. Which is why during the #FeesMustFall era, we witnessed a battle of ideas which eventually proved to be necessary to weed out the opportunist elements. This battle saw the rise of Fanon’s ideas in public discourse, while also bringing back Marxism-Leninism to the fore.

It is a pity that the battle of ideas occurred during a very critical point in the struggle for free education, however this battle of ideas led to a clear path, and it also exposed the opportunistic elements of certain leaders from the PYA (an alliance of SASCO, YCL, and ANCYL), who used this as an opportunity to attain parliamentary seats, and magazine cover spreads. This opportunism was eventually seen by the students, which is why the call to shutdown institutions does not excite students anymore because they know that their struggles are being used as an audition to rise in the ranks of their respective parties. While this was happening, EFFSC and PASMA cadres & activists were being arrested left, right, and centre due their more radical approach in the struggle for free education. PASMA mirrors the same tendency that dominated the Socialist Revolutionary Party in Tsarist Russia. They believe in a socialist order which is steeped in nationalist tendencies, masked as Pan-Africanism. Their refusal to come out as a non-racial organisation diminishes them into nothing but a sectarian student wing which has lost its spark.

Suffice to say that they agree on most questions with the EFFSC besides the point of non-racialism. This is due to the EFFSC being a product of the EFF, which in turn is a product of the Freedom Charter. I will not go into why the EFF is a product of the Freedom Charter, what I will emphasise is that the EFF, and its student wing EFFSC left the ANC due to them abandoning the Freedom Charter as their programme. It is on this basis that the EFFSC raises the clarion call of free quality well resourced, and decolonised education. This idea has been lost in the muddy waters of the opportunistic tendencies of SASCO, and in extension the PYA. This poverty of ideas has not only blunted the student movement, but it is draining the necessary energy required for the next tide. When the working class rises again to the call for liberation from capitalism, the student movement should be prepared to act as an auxiliary force and subordinate their programme to that of the workers. This can only happen if ideas are injected in the struggle.

Not just any ideas, but ideas that have proven overtime to work in advancing the revolutionary movement and completing its necessary tasks. One of those tasks being the complete overthrow of the capitalist regime. The overthrow of the capitalist regime is connected to the overthrow of commodified education. We cannot have free education in a capitalist system, this being due to the commodified nature of the system. The recent budget cuts to NSFAS are proof that #FeesMustFall – revolutionary as it was – was akin to one farting in the water, because those gains have been lost in a space of 4 years! That is why Rosa Luxemburg, and a plethora of other revolutionary Marxists agree that reforming the system is not the end goal; the end goal is to overthrow the system. This is not to say that we will not welcome reforms. Reforms are welcomed, however when we have a wealth of ideas, we understand that reforms are a temporary solution, while revolution is a permanent solution.

It is only through theoretical grounding, and not just any theory; but through a Marxist-Leninist theoretical framework and praxis that the students will overcome and win the battle for free quality, well resourced, and decolonised education for all!

On Students & The Institution by Lindokuhle Mponco

The students have always found themselves at loggerheads with the Institution. The first question we must ask ourselves is what the Institution is. An institution according to the Oxford dictionary is an organization founded for religious, educational, professional, or social purposes. To us Marxists, the Institution is a representation and the characterization of the State, based on the mode of production of that particular state. Another question that might arise is what is the mode of production? The mode of production according to Marxist theory is the way of producing, and it is a combination of:

1. Productive forces: Human labor power and the means of production (the tools used for producing the material goods and services needed in a society)

2. Social and relations of production: these include the property, power and control relations governing society's productive assets (often codified in law), cooperative work relations and forms of association, relations between people and the objects of their work and the relations between social classes. Essentially it is the power relations between the ruling class and the subject class. 

Marx also further went on to say that the mode of production influences all aspects of life. Lenin exposed this further in his classic work The State and Revolution. Lenin said, "Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in Greek republics: freedom for the slave-owners". He then goes further and uses an Institution of the State as an example in the following quote, "The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class shall represent them and repress them in parliament!" This is a very clear characterization of the State, and in turn its institutions. The Universities are no different because their duty is to educate the students in a way which will benefit the mode of production. We are essentially being trained to be tools of the mode of production. The mode of production in South Africa is not the so-called mixed economy, but rather a capitalist economy which follows the Keynesian model of economics. Keynes in his theory allows the State to intervene should the markets fail (And they do every 7 - 10 years!), and this leads to the State (being the institution of capital) to bail out the material base which produces the State. This is not sustainable in the long run and will not only ultimately lead to the demise of the State itself, but the mode of production itself. 

The universities therefore serve a purpose of being the educational and cultural custodian of the State. The universities are by default institutions meant to serve the State, and the leader of the State which is the ruling class, the Bourgeoisie! The Bourgeoisie in a nutshell are the upper layers of society. They accumulate more wealth than the rest of society, and within themselves there are two layers which are opposed to each other but eventually unite to protect their interests against the oppressed layers of society. The lower layer of this ruling class is the Petit/Petty Bourgeoisie, which is essentially your white-collar workers, or as they are commonly known professionals. The doctors, lawyers, clerks, accountants, economists, engineers, and teachers are this lower layer of the Bourgeoisie. However, over the years we have seen that most of these white-collar jobs are slowly but surely losing the material strength they had due to a stagnant economic system which is no longer developing the productive forces in a way that uplifts the majority from the pit of ignorance and poverty. The universities in South Africa still uphold an elitist character which represents their character of being meant for the upper layers of society, and not the oppressed layers of society, who are the working class, peasants, unemployed masses, and piece job workers (precariat). Even historically blacks only universities like the University of Fort Hare were not meant to uplift the oppressed layers of society and give them an education that will liberate the mind, but it was meant to turn the colonized indigenous folk into puppets of the capitalist system. 

Till today universities across the country, and even across the Capitalist world still maintain this very same character. The reason why they maintain this character is due to the existing mode of production. The reason why financial exclusion will always exist and will affect the poor in the current context is due to the existing mode of production. Capitalism in its nature leads to the commodification of everything in its wake. The commodification comes as a result of the profit motive, which is the driving force of capitalism. This profit motive affects everything in its wake like a cancer does. It commodifies even the most basic necessities required by society to reproduce life on a day-to-day basis. If the capitalist mode of production can commodify water, do you think education won't be commodified? The commodification follows the logic of capital to turn everything in its wake into commodities which one can buy and sell and make a profit from. This leads to the emphasis of quantity over quality, as is shown by the basic production of certain things like food. The more the capitalist system has grown the more the food has tasted duller due to the genetic modification of basic food stuffs in order to increase the quantity available. Education in South Africa is following the same pattern, and the phasing out of funding for certain courses is inspired by this profit motive. Supply and demand are determining which degrees will be funded by the National Financial Student Aid Scheme (NSFAS), and as a result poor students which come from working class, and peasantry backgrounds are being affected. The student populace is unfortunately misguided by a number of organizations which are supposed to serve them like the South African Union for Students (SAUS).

The students are being made to believe that they can conquer and win alone, when in reality that is not true. Whatever gain the students make will be wiped out by the capitalist system due to how its 'anarchy in production' leads to its occasional collapse. Marx was indeed right that the system has planted the seeds of its own destruction, and has also created its own gravediggers, the Working Class! The student movement in history has never gained anything sustainable without aligning itself with the Working Class. The class of 1976 were able to rise up in that fashion due to the resurgence of the strike movement which was led by the Working Class! The student therefore cannot achieve an institutional revolution without the assistance of the Working Class, while the Working Class cannot sustain their momentum without the energy of the students. The Russian Revolution, the Cuban Revolution, and the 1994 breakthrough moment in South Africa are an example of such. In the revolution, the students should subordinate their program, and their demands to the program of the workers. Free Education was never achieved in isolation from other sectors of societies; FREE EDUCATION WAS, HAS, WILL ALWAYS BE ATTAINED THROUGH AN ALLIANCE WITH THE WORKING CLASS!

Silambile and Sifuna Ukufunda!!!

 

                            SILAMBILE AND SIFUNA UKUFUNDA

 

                                                          BY

 

                             THE HUNGRY & BLOCKED STUDENTS

 

                                               

Status quo

There are ghosts scaring the students at the University of Fort Hare. These ghosts have been scaring and intimidating the students for quite some time, however, at this point they have become even more scarier. These unfriendly ghosts are called hunger, and its evil twin financial exclusion.

These two twins have been running rampant and the ghostbusters who are supposed to make sure these ghosts are banished from the land of the living are twiddling their thumbs pretending not to see the trauma these ghosts are causing. The ghostbusters are a group of student leaders called the SRC, and the political organisations that deployed them there. The current SRC is an interim SRC which came to life because of the COVID-19 pandemic which started in March 2020. The pandemic kept us locked at home and away from this institution. This led to a temporary structure that was supposed to guide us to the elections within the next three months after the term of the previous SRC expired. This term expired in the month of April 2020, that is a year ago.

This interim SRC led by the PYA (Progressive Youth Alliance), which consists of the following organisations, SASCO (South African Students’ Congress), ANC Youth League, and the Young Communist League of South Africa (aka YCL); has moved from crisis to crisis with the first crisis being the delayed provision of e-learning data and laptops. This crisis exposed the weaknesses of this collective, and not only exposed their tactical weaknesses, but their strategical weaknesses. The second crisis which confused and bamboozled them was the cohort system. In this system we witnessed students missing out on permits, and due to that falling behind in their academics. This required a strong push from opposition political heads and manifested in a physical confrontation between two student leaders in Alice who will not be named. The confrontation was more personal than political; however, this was due to the other political head protecting the deployees from the PYA. Once the permit system was finally sorted out, we went into another crisis, which has been carried over to this year. This crisis was the late payment of food allowances for NSFAS funded students, and the slow payment of change for students funded by other bursary schemes.

We can see that this crisis has spilt over into the new academic year where we see the slow and frustrating loading of allowances. This is a result of an SRC led by leaders who are content with the crumbs that management gives in the form of reforms and concessions. The PYA-led SRC has demonstrated that it is not capable of taking the issues of students forward, and the crisis comes to epic proportions in the Student Services office of both campuses. The lack of spine, and revolutionary will by both officers has led to us students believing that our voices will never be heard. The height of this display of arrogance by our so-called leaders is capped off by the fact that they communicate outcomes of meetings when they feel like it. When an easy victory is won, we are bombarded with statements that praise the PYA-led SRC, but when the victory is not won, we are confronted by silence from them. It is a shame that we have reached this point but let us be honest with ourselves, we would not be where we are if we acted decisively and dealt with these so-called leaders.

 The fact that we still have a lot of students who are financially blocked says a lot and speaks about the poor administrative abilities of the institution. The management has been getting away with murder because we have an SRC that marches according to the dictates of the management.

 

                                                            Way Forward

 

One may ask what is the way forward to this mess we find ourselves in? The answer to this will be broken down into the following key pressing demands:

i)             The immediate loading of allowances for all NSFAS funded and other bursary funded students.

ii)            An immediate unblocking of all students who are financially excluded due to the reality that the COVID-19 pandemic collapsed many livelihoods.

iii)           An extension of the registration period to accommodate students who have not been allowed to register due to the unjust blocking system.

iv)           The scrapping of the blanket blocking system due to how it always leads the institution to near administrative collapse (One of these days the administrative arm will collapse!!!).

v)            The immediate rollout of data, and a blanket system approach to be implemented.

vi)           The immediate release of lease forms for non-res students.

vii)          The immediate opening of the appeal window to allow NSFAS funded and NSFAS first time applicants to appeal their statuses.

viii)        The subsidization of the laptop loan-to-buy system. It is unjust to charge us R6000 for a laptop that retails at R2900.

This in a nutshell is where we should go. We are tired of fighting for the same issues over, and over again. One of these days we will revolt, and when we do some will wish they were never born.

 

 EDITOR'S NOTE

This was written by anonymous comrades who would like to express their anger at the SRC.