The Battle of Ideas: The Bolshevik view on where we must go by Lindokuhle Mponco

 Introduction

As we head into the 3rd National People's Assembly we are confronted with the reality of rebuilding, advancing, and defending the struggle for economic freedom in our lifetime. With that being the reality that confronts our July 26 Movement, we have no option but to promote, campaign, and lobby for political ideas and leaders who will be constructive in the quest to achieve such. In the political vacuum of silence that is gripping the province of the Eastern Cape due to the silence of the PCT, and seeing other Provincial leaders making pronouncements of their preferred candidates, we have no option but to provide revolutionary guidance and make it clear and sundry to all members and the public which ideas we support and who we see best fit to ascend to the Central Command Team. This article will explore the current challenges and answer the revolutionary question of what is to be done?

 

We need Bolsheviks!

When the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) was confronted with reality of a brewing revolution, they convened a Party congress (1902) in London since most of the core leadership was based in the UK due to being exiled. The question that confronted them was on how best where they supposed to organise themselves going forward. There was a bloc within the Party which argued for a mass democratic approach and a politically flexible system which would allow private and public dissent should there be no consensus. While the other bloc made an argument for the Party to focus on building a core of cadres or professional revolutionaries who would be ideologically trained to be the vanguard of the working class, and to keep the Party small amid censorship and banishment. On top of that they made an argument for a system which would allow for democratic debate to ensue but when the majority decides, all members must abide with the decision and dissent would not be tolerated. This system is known as Democratic Centralism. These two sides are known as the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks were led by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, while the Mensheviks were led by Julius Martov and Georgi Plekhanov. The Bolsheviks won the ultimate discussion of Democratic Centralism being adopted leading to a split between the two blocs which would go on to characterise the Marxist movement in Russia, and ultimately the world, especially after the triumph of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.

The EFF is confronted by a similar trend; however, it manifests itself in the form of Electoralism vs Revolutionism. The other side consists of leaders and supporters who firmly believe that the EFF must continue to pursue democratic means of overcoming the Neoliberal regime and rely on liberal bourgeois democracy to undo capitalism while the other side makes a strong argument for the creation of an alternative democracy which will create dual power, and lead us into a revolutionary situation, and ultimately lead us on the path to revolution. The Spark identifies as a Bolshevik outlet and as such we align ourselves with the ideas that seek to dispute the recurring theme which is contained in the discussion documents since 2014 that we are not ready to lead a revolution against capitalism. The analysis is partially correct given the subjective conditions that we are gripped with but partially wrong given the objective conditions that make it ripe for revolution. While we are still resolving our internal matters, the revolutionary tide keeps moving and it will move with or without us. This philistinism trend of wanting the movement to be subjected to a permanent cycle of competing in a liberal bourgeois space which is skewed in the favour of parties who are the core of the GNU is not assisting in building a truly revolutionary Party which can lead a revolutionary movement that can liquidate capitalism.

The EFF has a historical mission to liquidate capitalism and bring about a socialist dispensation, however, that will not be achieved if we still have electoralists at the helm of the Party. It is from this point of perspective that we make the solid argument that we must promote, lobby, and campaign for leaders who will lead us into a revolutionary situation, and ultimately ensure we liquidate capitalist relations of production. When the Bolshevik Party embarked on their quest to liquidate the Provisional Government of Kerensky, they had only 200 000 members, while we boast over a million members. It can't be that we are failing to locate the weak point and gaps that will enable us to establish a popular democratic outlet which will counter-balance the established institutions like Parliament. Our participation must move from simply exposing the hypocrisy of the ruling class, to active mobilisation of the masses to reject the institution itself and expose it as a nothing but a reformist structure. Most of the electorate has already rejected bourgeois elections, ours is to emphasise that which they have already rejected and provide a revolutionary posture and explanation. Lenin in 1917 after his arrival from Switzerland made sure the Bolshevik Party distances itself from the Provisional Government and actively promotes the Soviets as the organ of popular rule, thus creating a reality of dual power. It took a Special Congress for that to be achieved, and it was achieved after he published the classic April Theses. 

Some within the sections of the Party called it Trotskyism, however, history proved Lenin and Trotsky correct. Our people need to be conscientized and shown in clear and scientific terms that this liberal bourgeois democracy has failed, and that the power to create a new alternative lies in their hands, and only their hands. This is the role the Vanguard Party must play in the intervening period, consistent with the method of Lenin of patiently explaining the conditions of the masses. However, to patiently explain the conditions we need a leadership stratum that has the ideological ability to explain and explain until our people are convinced that the only way out of this neoliberal hell is through a popular revolution which will be guided by a United Front of Workers' Parties, Unions, and Civic based organisations. This intervening period does not need leaders who will have egos, arrogance, and a sense of 'being in charge'. It needs leaders who will not blindly unify with distorters of Marxism and non-Marxists who seek to undermine the revolutionary science of a Marxist oriented revolution. It is quite clear to the most politically backward individual that the system has failed to address the needs of the people adequately. Even the Congress movement silently admits that they have failed to accomplish the first stage of the NDR, thus forcing them into the arms of neoliberals. Such is bound to happen when one follows a thoroughly Menshevik approach of stagism. The two-stage theory in as far as South Africa is concerned has failed, thus a Bolshevik approach is needed not an electoralist one. 

It is on this basis that we raise the clarion call that those who should emerge must be leaders who understand this reality and will not only stop at understanding but will advance it. The EFF needs Leaders who are not accustomed or draw inspiration from the perks and privileges which come from serving in Parliament, Legislative bodies, and Municipal Councils. The EFF needs dedicated revolutionaries who will ensure that all layers of leadership from Central down to the VD Task Forces are in tune with the demands of the masses and what is required to advance the revolutionary. In sum, we do not want Mensheviks at the driving wheel. Already we have seen some of these Mensheviks leave for other parties that either have nothing in common with us or are non-Marxist in character, while some have gone straight into the clutches of a feudal socialist party. It is time for the Bolsheviks to stand up and be counted.

 

 

 

What is to be done?

As a contributor of this Bolshevik revolutionary publication, we want to make it clear that we support, endorse, and openly declare our support for a fellow Bolshevik by the name of Comrade-Fighter Chumani Matiwane. Fighter Chumani Matiwane is a tried and tested leader who was the first Regional Chairperson of one of the fastest growing regions in terms of electorate share and membership, the Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality. He led the EFF in its first Local Government Elections, and the EFF attained a 7.97% electoral share, and 8 seats in total, which was 0.19% behind the national average. This laid the foundation for an improvement in 2021 to 12.06% due to their performance in council and in the metro. As leader of the caucus for the most part, this saw the Party gain traction and relevance which continues to grow everyday under the current leadership of Fighter Mziyanda Hlekiso. The Party has also shown confidence in him by deploying him to national and provincial debates to articulate the position of the Party, and he has done well in providing perspective with the utmost clarity. Furthermore, Fighter Chumani Matiwane is a clinical writer who contributes to The Spark and provides ideological clarity on certain issues that need the necessary experience and clarity that some contributors including me, cannot provide. This is a Marxist-Leninist-Fanonian revolutionary who adheres to Bolshevik principles of advancing the revolution in all sites of the struggle, including the picket lines.

In our open endorsement, we cannot leave behind the contributions and his good working relationship with all leadership structures that have come after him, and his contributions in advancing the revolution. We openly believe that him being part of the Central Command Team and being in the central make-up of the Leadership, he will contribute to the ideological consistency, and ideological sharpening that is required in the intervening period and it will come to fruition as he is one of the members who were there in 2013 when this revolutionary movement was born. His storied activism in the then Vista Campus, which is now known as Nelson Mandela University, Missionvale Campus is documented, and his political peers who were with him in the trenches of the PYA agree that he is a revolutionary par excellence. It is on this note that we openly declare that Fighter Chumani Matiwane must be elected by revolutionaries who adhere to Bolshevik principles and want to see the movement going in a revolutionary trajectory that will ultimately liquidate capitalist relations of production. We call upon the elected delegates to cast away their fears and deliver a Bolshevik into the CCT so that the Party moves towards the necessary and logical conclusion of this neoliberal impasse, which is a popular revolution which will usher in socialism in our lifetime!

The concrete analysis: on the formation of the EFF Youth Command by MAB Shongwe

 

The concrete analysis: on the formation of the EFF Youth Command
MAB Shongwe

 

Introduction.

On the 10^th of October 2024, the President and Commander in Chief of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), together with the officials addressed a media briefing on the upcoming 3^rd National People’s Assembly (3^rd NPA) and other domestic and international politics.

In relation to the 3^rd NPA, the core objective of the presser was to present the core messages carried by the various discussion documents. The discussion documents seek to facilitate, guide, and coordinate discussions outside and inside the conference, as conferences of the EFF are not only about electing new leadership but reflecting on the party, evaluate its leadership and its work of the last five years, thereafter, give mandate of the next five years to the organisation and the leadership that will emerge.

Speaking on the core message carried by the document on organisational character and redesign, the CIC indicated that the document ponders on whether in the formation of the Youth Command, does the EFFSC ceases to exist, or continues to exist, if it does continue existing, in what format. To quote directly from the document, it ponders “In the formation of the Youth Command, the NPA must decide if the Student Command becomes the chapter of the Youth Command, or it becomes the Youth Command altogether. Meaning, branches that exist in campuses become youth command based in institutions of higher learning and as those in ward. In addition, we must also determine if we also form youth command branches in high schools in the founding of the Youth Command. In essence, all education institutions must have an EFF presence”.

In this article, we are going to argue that first and foremost, the EFFSC must continue existing but expand its mandate to basic education. Secondly, we are going to argue that in the current conjuncture, we do not need the EFFYC but what we must do, if the organisation strongly believes the youth component is neglected (which in itself is a serious point of debate), we can remodel existing structures, particularly at ward level such that they have a component that deals specifically with youth issues. Lastly, we are going to argue that in the event where the EFFYC is eventually formed, it must not happen at the expense of the EFFSC, the EFFSC and EFFYC can and must coexist.

On the existence of the EFFSC

As indicated in the introductory session, our firm view is that the EFFSC in its current form is a solid organisation that has captured the imagination and support of young people and workers in institutions of higher education. Furthermore, it is an organisation that contributes meaningfully to the growth and politics of the EFF, particularly electoral politics.

To demonstrate our case, we are going to deal what we characterise as Criticism of the Past and the practical response to such critique by the EFFSC, which has contributed to the solid organisation it is today. Lastly, we are going to use the recent departure of Floyd Shivambu to demonstrate how the EFFSC remains the first line of defence of the EFF whenever it is under attack from political opponents and the hostile white-owned media.

 

Criticism of the past

In the 3^rd National Students’ Assembly (3^rd NSA), the CIC strongly critiqued the EFFSC, arguing that it was struggling to have a life of its own, run its affairs, contest and win SRC elections without the heavy reliance on the EFF. He further strongly argued that the decision to form the EFFSC was a mistake, since the EFF was itself still forming (we return to this particular view later in the article).

The EFF, through its national leaders, notably the former deputy president who has lost his senses, criticised the EFFSC inability to convert the support it enjoys in institutions of higher education, particularly support in SRC elections, to the electoral fortunes of the EFF.

In wards where there are institutions of higher education where the EFFSC enjoyed electoral hegemony in SRC elections, the EFF did not enjoy the same support.

Of course, this was a serious contradiction as the EFFSC does not exist for itself but as correctly captured in its Constitution, it is established in terms of the EFF Constitution to rally on young people and workers behind the struggle of economic freedom in our lifetime, under the stewardship of the EFF.

 

Response to the criticism

The EFFSC warmly welcomed the correct observation of the CIC, and the leadership that emerged in the 3^rd NSA was charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the contradictions identified by the CIC were sharpened. And in the years that followed, the EFFSC went on to build a very solid organisation that had the capacity to run its programs, and most importantly build a machinery for SRC elections.

The EFFSC went on to win many institutions of higher education in the country which were previously led by the criminal cartel masquerading as a political formation called SASCO.

The leadership of the 4^th NSA took this work to a different level, which for the first time managed to host an anniversary rally of the EFFSC in 2023 without heavy reliance on the EFF. The EFFSC won SRC elections in almost all universities in the country, and for the first time, won SRC elections in all universities in the Eastern Cape province, a former stronghold of SASCO and stronghold of the ANC.

In relation to the inability of the EFFSC to translate its votes in institutions of higher education to votes of the EFF in local voting stations and wards, the EFFSC responded by making this question the core business of its 4^th NSA. And the 4^th NSA made intervention which will transform the EFFSC as an organisation fundamentally and respond to the above contradiction.

The EFFSC amended its Constitution and made it mandatory that for one to be a member of the EFFSC, outside being a registered student in an institution of higher education, that person must be a member of the EFF in a local ward, and they must be registered voters with the IEC.

Outside of this important amendment to the Constitution, the EFFSC 4^th NSA leadership led massive voter registration campaigns across the country in all institutions of higher education. This program ensured that many young people who believe and support the EFFSC in universities and TVET colleges, register to vote for the EFF in the May election.

And the result of the work that was done in the 4^th NSA in amending the Constitution and the massive voter registration programs that were ran were shown on both the voting day and after. In voting stations that where within and in proximity to institutions of higher education, young people came out in their numbers as seen in the videos that were circulating on social media on the day of voting. And the election results demonstrated that majority of those young people were voting for the EFF, as in voting stations within and in proximity to institutions of higher education, the EFF either registered exponential growth or even won such VDs, and even wards in some cases.

In the past 4 to 5 years, the EFFSC has managed to establish itself as a solid organisation that is support massively by students and workers in institutions of higher education. It has built itself as an organisation that responds to its core mandate of rallying students who support it behind the electoral fortunes of the EFF, and the May election proved that beyond any reasonable doubt.

The only question that the EFFSC must respond to, is the question of the challenges of basic education, of absent and debilitated infrastructure, absence of study materials and facilities, shortage of teachers, violence and drug abuse, and many other challenges. In the absence of the Leaners Command, the EFFSC must be able to fill such a gap through expanding its mandate to basic education, this can be done through establishing higher school cells which will be led by leaners and work closely with the leadership of the EFFSC.

 

On the formation of the Youth Command

I.B Tabata in his letter to Nelson Mandela makes a very profound observation, arguing that in the context of the struggle for a better life for the African working-class, the importance of organisation does not lie on the subjective goodwill of its leaders and the well thoughts of its members. What is important, is that objectively, what contribution the organisation makes in the advancement of the objectives of the struggle.

On the formation, we must take guidance from Tabata and ponder on whether objectively, do the material conditions within the organisation and the political environment domestically dictate the formation of the EFFSC.

Let us take a brief tour to history of the formation of the Congress Youth League in the 1940s, an important generation in our pursuit of economic freedom in our lifetime. The formation of the Congress Youth League was not a product of the subjective aspirations of certain individuals, but was necessitated by the prevailing objective material conditions of that time. The ANC was an ineffectual organisation whose main method of struggle was appealing to the conscience of the oppressor to recognise and accommodate the natives, particularly the educated elite, was proving useless. Africans were landless and confined to unproductive and underdeveloped homelands, they were subjected to forced labour and perpetual violence, poverty, and despair. The ANC was unable to respond to all this, it is these conditions of Africans and the inability of the ANC to respond that resulted in the formation of the Congress Youth League.

The Congress Youth League will go on to inspire and lead a radical trajectory which reshaped, repositioned, and rejuvenated the liberation movement in the country. Most notably, was the Program of Action. The YL will go on to produce future leaders of the African revolution, the likes of Prof Sobukwe, A.P Mda, Anton Lembede, Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo, and many others.

In pondering about forming the YC, we must be guided by the prevailing material conditions. And our view is that in the current conjuncture, we do not need the YC. The organisation is coming from a very difficult election which saw the organisation’s electoral performance declining for the first time since its formation.

The post-election context is even more challenging, with leaders and members defecting to the MKP. Similarly, we do not think there is anyone who can demonstrate objectively, that the EFF does not respond to issues of young people and thus needs a YC to fill that gap. In fact, the EFF is an organisation that is led by young people and enjoys the support of many young people across the country. On issues of young people, most notably being unemployment, it is the EFF that has been at the forefront of speaking about the issue and proposing sound interventions. In the election manifesto, the EFF proposes unemployment grants for young people, with educational background as a criterion for how much each unemployed young person will get.

It is true that young people suffer the most for the socioeconomic post-apartheid disaster of the so-called democratic project, but the EFF represents and responds to such challenges to the best of its ability, in parliament and in the legislature, including through programs on the ground.

Lastly, I think it is important to take cue from the intervention of the CIC in the 3^rd NSA of the EFFSC. He argues that the EFF is still forming itself, it was a mistake to establish another organisation while the EFF was itself forming. The EFF and its EFFSC while being very solid organisations, they are still forming. With the challenges of the recent electoral decline and the looming 2026 Local Government Elections, the EFF must not form another organisation but must dedicate its effort towards rebuilding and building a machinery for the 2026 LGE.

If the organisation strongly believe that the youth component is neglected, in the immediate a YC is not the answer, but we can remodel our regional and local structures such that they have a component, similar to the GBV and Labour desks, to respond to issues and challenges of young people.

 

 

Coexistence of the EFFSC and EFFYC

Our view that we do not need the EFFYC in the immediate does not mean a YC will not be formed in the future. In an event where the EFFYC is formed, it must not be at the expense of the EFFSC, the two must coexist.

Responding to media questions during the press address, the CIC indicates that they do not want the situation of SASCO and the ANCYL where they fight and contest each other. On the organisational character and redesign, the document makes a profound observation that as the EFF, we must not measure ourselves using existing political formations in the country, but we must measure ourselves in relation to our guiding documents and our work in communities, in parliament and the legislature. The ANCYL and SASCO openly defy, contradict, and denounce the ANC, its leaders, and its resolutions. Regional ANC leaders contradict Provincial leaders, Provincial leaders contradict National leaders. In the EFF you will never find such ill-discipline, there is command and control, there is democracy in discussion but adherence to decisions and resolution, lower structures respect the wisdom and decisions of higher structures. The EFFSC respects the EFF, its leaders, and its resolutions, it will do the same with the YC.

We firmly believe that when the YC is eventually formed, it will coexist with the EFFSC.

 

Overcoming The Sgameka Tendency by Chumani Matiwane

Introduction

The life of an organisation depends on a culture which develops along the behaviours or conduct of its membership. It is merely not enough to have a revolutionary founding manifesto without vigorous training of the membership on the party line. The mistakes that arise from a lack of cadre development have led to the collapse of many revolutionary movements. 

On Infiltration & Bourgeois Co-option

One of the major challenges of building a revolutionary movement within a bourgeois political system is the high possibility of infiltration that can lead to the co-option of the leadership. The trappings of this system first present themselves when the party has to deploy members to the various Legislatures. We have to bear in mind that our democracy is a product of secret dealings between the white billionaire class and leaders of the former liberation movement. Essentially this means that at the base of our political system is the creation of a comprador class by big business to protect its hold on the economy. Thus, the economic relations of Apartheid South Africa were never dismantled in our negotiated settlement. One would argue that as a nation we have never attained national liberation which would allow us to conduct our own affairs with the outside interference of big business and imperialist forces. This is the context within which the EFF exists, therefore it has to grapple with these forces which at every moment will want to turn it into another reformist movement or broad church without ideological conviction.

A tendency develops within a movement as a result of planned activities by agent provocateurs or through sheer ignorance on the part of the membership. It can become cancerous and with time it can entrench itself as a culture within the movement. This can rapidly dislodge a relatively young movement like the EFF if the membership is not capacitated with the correct tools of analysis. As we have alluded to before, it is not enough to declare on paper that the party adheres to the Marxism-Leninist-Fanonian tools of analysis without a clear program to train membership on how to correctly apply these tools in the analysis of the party itself. A party should be able to match theory and practice. What we have learnt from the former liberation movement is an attempt to suspend practice to the day of revolution. By this we mean, the revolution is turned into a destination sometime in the future that we will magically arrive in and only then will we be able to practice theory. The attainment of political power is set as a precondition for the full exercise of the party's founding manifesto. This is taking a defeatist approach to struggle. When one member calls for a boycott of products of a certain Billionaire, a Leader will claim that it is practically impossible with questions like 'what will we eat if we boycott his businesses?"

Understanding the Sgameka Tendency?

The Sgameka Tendency comes as a result of the trappings of power that come with deployment of members to legislatures. It creeps in first by reducing elected Leadership into administrators of the revolution. This results in the creation of a social distance within the movement and the development of a "Baaskap" relationship between elected Leadership and Ground forces. The challenge then lies in the fact that participation in the movement is voluntary. Therefore, when a member gets discouraged, they withdraw their active participation in the life of the organisation. This means that we end up having less feet on the ground as the moral of Ground forces is killed by this tendency. As a practical demonstration of this tendency is when members are called to a door-to-door campaign. On arrival the leadership will sit in their vehicles and not participate in the physical program. At the end of the day when a meeting is called to account on the day's work, the same person who was sitting in a vehicle the whole day will deride Ground forces for being useless as targets have not been met. If we had 10 Ground forces on the day, the next day the numbers would be reduced as the moral was crushed by this "Baaskap" approach to Leadership. 

What is to be done?

To combat this tendency, we need to advocate for the establishment of a political school that will continuously train Leadership on the correct party line. This will translate to branch level as capacitated Leadership will have a grasp of the strategy and tactics needed to keep the organisation grounded. If we fail to do so, we will become another failed project because when theory fails to match practice it creates a gap for opportunism as manifested by careerism as opposed to a membership grounded within community struggles. The Commander-in-Chief has expressed that there can be no Activists where there is no activity. The permanent factions established act as gatekeepers thus reducing branches only to machinery for advancing the needs of a cabal. The state of branches is dire as BCTs only meet on the day they are elected after that no induction is conducted to capacitate the new leadership. This means that our branches are not visible in the communities but only exist on paper. The CCT has attempted to arrest this tendency by introducing the 10% threshold. This needs further interventions by introducing a digitised membership system that will only confirm membership through a system of OTPs or QR Codes that can only be generated by one device linked to a RICAd cell number for an example.

 As we move onto the next decade of our struggle it is vital that we tighten our controls in order to counter counter-revolutionary forces who seek to hijack or derail our movement from fulfilling its generational mission.

EFFSC In UFH Governance: We must not be ashamed of claiming our Victories! by Lindokuhle Mponco

 

Introduction

The EFFSC in the University of Fort Hare attained a majority in the SRC on the 18th of October 2023. In that intervening period, there have been memorable wins which will go down as longstanding and memorable wins given the nature of challenges. We have never strayed from the revolutionary path even though we are revolutionary enough to admit that mistakes were made along the way. A truly revolutionary party is a party that can make mistakes, is not afraid of making mistakes, and acknowledges when it makes a mistake. Our journey has been such a journey, however, the EFFSC Led-SRC has demonstrated that it has the power to not only correct its mistakes, but to correct them flawlessly. This article will delve deeper into some of the victories that the EFFSC Led-SRC has notched up in its tenure as a majority in the SRC institutionally. 

 

The Victories: Hall of Fame

 

1. #VOETSEKNORRACO

 

The termination of the Direct Payment System (DPS) is one victory that we will constantly parade and articulate to the public as a victory that was in its core driven by the EFFSC in the grassroots, and at the SRC level, the EFFSC-led SRC championed its termination. This was a conclusion of a yearlong struggle which had gripped the entire sector. The role played by the SRC Secretary-General during that period (Fighter Yamkela Situnda) ensured that we manage to coordinate a national response to the matter at an SRC level. This led us to a point whereby the Pilot Project crisis converged with crisis stemming from Direct Payment. It got to a point whereby a national shutdown was threatened, with the CSCT of the EFFSC preparing for a meeting of all its SRC Deployees to ensure maximum national unity. However, the former Minister, Blade Nzimande countered the impending National shutdown by dissolving the NSFAS board, placing NSFAS under administration, and pushing NSFAS to announce immediate termination of the contracts with the 4 bogus fintech companies. This has given momentum to the payment of outstanding allowances for 2023 with 2 payments being made already for the students who are owed by NSFAS. We are pushing for more payments to come through because we have realised that not everyone has received what is due to them.

 

2. Course-Codes

 

The EFFSC Led-SRC has managed to strategically and tactically ensure that 19 course codes are aligned to the DHET HEMIS and NSFAS HEMIS system which in previous years had seen many students being defunded. This initial number were 5 course codes which were mainly in the Faculty of Management & Commerce in the current year, however, upon the consistent pressure we applied as a collective which is majority EFFSC, we not only managed to resolve the year adjustments for the 5 initial course codes that were identified but for 19 in total across all faculties. This was proof to us that DHET and NSFAS do not have integrated systems with the University, and as such this reality creates a crisis within an already existing crisis of a lack of funding for many cohorts of students. The EFFSC-Led SRC is now in the final stages of ensuring that funding status adjustments are underway, in the coming week this will be pursued vigorously given that the targeted month for disbursement was the month of September, after this matter was resolved in late August.

 

3. Review of Close-out process towards a more inclusive Close-out process

 

By ensuring that we successfully resolve the course codes, we have successfully triggered a process which will see the close out process being reviewed to be inclusive of other years from around 2018 - 2024, to ensure that all debts are cleared and to be specifically inclusive of the students who were affected by course codes. This will see a lot of debts cleared, and a lot of students receiving their degree certificates. This process will ensure that all who owe the institution due to course codes, are no longer owing. Will continue to pester NSFAS about this, even though we are aware that this might even affect some aspects of the SIU investigation which is underway.

 

4. Learners License Programme

 

Since 2019, the EFFSC has advocated for a learner's license programme which will equip students with learner's license and enable them to do a driver's license. This programme was pioneered in Alice with Raymond Mhlaba Local Municipality before it was even implemented in East London campus in conjunction with Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality. We can reliably confirm that the MOU has been signed by BCMM, with the institution yet to confirm receipt of the signed MOU, and the signing thereof. Speculation is that the institution is planning a grand ceremony whereby the Vice-Chancellor will sign. However, we are clear that this MOU must be signed immediately instead of it being reserved to be signed on some distant day when some students who can benefit from it should be benefitting from it. Obviously, the programme will need a proper rollout and modalities which include instructors, and tutors who will assist students prepare for their learner's exam. We hope that the students will give us another mandate to finish what we started.

 

Conclusion

The aim of this article was not to provide a lengthy read on our victories but provide a straight to the point read which will demystify, and clarify the victories, and the current challenges we are facing to ensure we deliver things in totality and not in parts, even though material conditions this year have been pushing us to win in phases. Amilcar Cabral teaches us to claim no easy victories, mask no failures, and tell no lies. We have never lied or claimed easy victories as that would be anti-Marxist. We are in the long fight for a total victory against capitalism, but the revolutionary process is not an overnight process. We have realised as many other revolutionaries realised that building a revolutionary society is not an easy task. The birth pains of building a system which is inclusive, progressive, and revolutionary have been felt in some sections, while some have misinterpreted these as pains of the opposite. Karl Marx once posited that force is the midwife of the revolution, therefore suggesting that the transition from one society requires force for it to be successful, due to the existing force of the ruling class which maintains bourgeois law and order. We have witnessed this force, and we realise that for the next phase of our struggle, the boardroom will slowly become a site of struggle that will not be enough to win some victories, and we will require many more mass demonstrations to get our point across. However, to build such a radical environment, we must decisively defeat all counterrevolutionary elements by persuading students to give us another mandate by pointing to these victories and more. We must continue to mobilise students towards voting for the EFFSC on the 19^th of September 2024 so that we can continue the revolutionary process.

 

 

EFFSC in Governance at UFH: We have a good story to tell! by Lindokuhle Mponco

 Introduction

The EFFSC gained majority status in the SRC of the University of Fort Hare on the 18th of October after a decisive victory against Neoliberal forces by successfully presenting a plan, and a programme that espoused the radical demands of the student populace. The EFFSC set out on a path of ensuring there is a tangible programme of infrastructure development, increase in bursaries and scholarships to curb the growing unfunded character of our student populace, increase in the enrolment rate of the institution as epitomised by the spirit of Sizofunda Ngenkani campaign, termination of the services of Norraco, removal of Blade Nzimande, creating a credible system of ensuring bed capacity increases while opening the room for deviations where practical impossibility exists, increasing standards and living conditions, increased investment in sports & recreational development, resolving the transport crisis and making strategic headway in increasing the fleet, fostering developmental programmes for all minority groups, and providing a dialectical approach to policy implementation, and understanding in as far as the institution is concerned. In this article I will explore our successes and failures in ensuring this programme of radical development is implemented. I will also dialectically analyse the subjective and objective factors that led to some triumphs and defeats, while providing a political diagnosis of the current political terrain, and how the tenure of the EFFSC led to the current material conditions in as far as the political sphere is concerned.

 

The Programme of the EFFSC-led SRC: Successes & Failures

The programme of the EFFSC was steeped in Marxist-Leninist praxis, and a Fanonian understanding that the University of Fort Hare was in a period reactionary deliberately mischaracterised as the 'decade of renewal' while in practical terms the institution was entering a phase of rapid neo liberalisation not only of the administrative functions, but also of the student governance space. The programme of the EFFSC was therefore built on the ultimate principle that the EFFSC must defend radical student activism by advancing a radical programme of action which seeks to promote student democracy, and project the student voice. It was not only limited to that but also expanded to tangible developmental programme which is steeped in infrastructure development. Thus, the EFFSC from the onset pursued a radical programme of action in a bid to radically shift the paradigm and shift the tides of history in as far as University of Fort Hare is concerned. By shifting the tides, we must understand it as re-radicalising the student populace, while ensuring that service delivery across the board improves. However, the immediate impediment of this revolutionary programme which would ideally serve as a bridge towards a more radical, and outrightly socialist outlook was the Institutional Management's concern for cost cutting, and financial sustainability, which is a cornerstone of neoliberal economics and politics.

 

The infrastructure development programme which can be clustered into two major projects (asbestos removal and smart classroom project) were projects that we immediately pursued outside of the operational issues such as outstanding allowances, and registration refund. The asbestos removal project was already in its initial stages, and we simply emphasized the part of implementation and ensuring it is done within the timeframes that would enable students to see the tangible work being done. Indeed, we saw that happening in both campuses with the project being fully completed in East London Campus (Main Building), while the project in Alice Campus is 60 - 70% complete given the fact that many buildings have asbestos. Amid contractors downing tools and a maintenance department which is understaffed, we have managed to make headway, and the completion of renovations at the Library in the Main Campus (Alice) stands as a one tangible site of victory in the war against asbestos. The infrastructure developments were not limited to asbestos removal but also the renovation of the Health Centres in both campuses, and East London Campus bearing the most rapid evidence of such. The only thing that needs to be done is outside painting and fitting in new signage. In Alice, more needs to be done, however, the challenges in the maintenance department have crippled the efforts to have a rapid solution for Alice Campus. It has become a definitive priority point for the next term, and as such developments in that area will be heightened. The Smart Classroom Project has been another project which has been pursued by the EFFSC-led SRC to ensure that our classrooms are aligned to the demands of the fourth Industrial Revolution. As such, this project is nearing completion phase with many of the renovated venues in both campuses exhibiting and demonstrating the transition. Once again, East London campus due to its size has demonstrated a more rapid development in that area. As a result, the developments must be welcomed even though we must emphasize that more needs to be done, and more should be done.

 

The improvement of service delivery has been another imperative of the EFFSC-led SRC programme of action. In many areas we experienced service delivery improvements (Health Care Centre, HIV/AIDS Unit, Disability Unit, GBVP Unit, SCU), while Residence Department and Financial Aid were largely hampered by the NSFAS accommodation pilot project, and the dissolution of the NSFAS board, which has affected aspects of NSFAS pre-funders (Funza Lushaka & COID), while Transport Department was in free-fall mode, with SRC interventions and ideas being the saving grace to a total collapse. The evident failures and weaknesses in some areas of Residence Department can be laid squarely at the feet of the Department of Higher Education, more particularly NSFAS. The Accommodation Pilot Project while trying to provide a framework to a largely unregulated environment of private student accommodation, failed to provide accommodation which met the necessary standards that indicate an improvement in standards of living. The pilot project is a mess from the starting point (allocation) to the final point of payment for a student (payment to landlord). This is also heightened by the random and somewhat arbitrary defunding of NSFAS beneficiaries which endanger, and cause precarity in the lives of students. The confusion created by NSFAS on the status of pre-funders (Funza Lushaka & COID) in as far as the pilot project is concerned has also caused another gap, which proves that NSFAS was not ready to implement this programme.

 

Financial Aid & Bursaries has also been dragged into this mess, and as a result a large amount of focus has been spent on resolving the contradictions, and issues that arise from the failed experiment that has been the pilot project. This project while well-meaning, has led to students being subjected to staying in accommodations which do not even qualify for B grading or A grading due to the deficiencies and ineffectiveness of the NSFAS accreditation system. The NSFAS accommodation pilot project has been a failure which has added more problems than provide solutions as it has opened students to slower service delivery and maintenance resolution mechanisms. We have had to deal with landlords and in some cases, drag NSFAS to the picture to ensure they pay landlords so that services that should be rendered are rendered. While that has been a shared problem of the Residence Department and Financial Aid, Residence Department had to deal with the crisis of allocation, which was expertly resolved in collaboration with SRC. We ensured that no student sleeps in a hallway, under the bridge or in the streets. As a result, we have surplus beds in accredited accommodations of close to 409 in East London campus, while in Alice we have managed to successfully convince NSFAS to allow a deviation to the pilot project. We are not happy with the paltry sum of R2500 per month for accommodation, we are pushing for an increase to R4500, however, this battle will be thoroughly pursued by those who know it, and those who understand it from its roots. Not Johnny Come Late Organisations that seek to render student governance into a popularity contest.

 

We have also managed to improve maintenance issues in both campuses where the institution has direct control and intervention. For the first time in a long time, June renovations of residences became a reality, with some continuing with ongoing minor renovations and maintenance upkeep. It must be stated that these gains have not been made solely from an individualistic perspective of Office holders, but from the collective effort of strategic intervention by Campus Heads, and assistance and technical & tactical support by Student Services Officers who have managed to ensure that the Department moves from crisis to crisis largely intact, and still providing its basic service of housing students in adequate accommodation, even though some students are subjected to less than adequate. The gaps have been identified, and the gaps will be plugged by the only Organisation that possesses a proper Scientific method of resolving issues, and implementing its programme, the EFFSC. 

 

Financial Aid & Bursaries has largely experienced swings from good to bad then bad to good due to the evident impact of NSFAS being put under administration, and the transition from Dr. Blade Nzimande to Dr. Nobuhle Nkabane. These transitions have played a role in even how NSFAS has carried itself throughout the year. This has also played out and trickled down to the NSFAS pre-funders who have been largely insulated from the crises of NSFAS. However, the blame cannot be solely attributed to NSFAS's inefficiencies and inadequacies. The blame must also be apportioned to certain staff members who have made it a habit to work when they want to and when they don't want to. In some cases, they have tried to sabotage the work of the SRC in trying to resolve the longstanding financial issues that have been gripping the campuses of this Institution. However, we must also be cognizant of the fact that Financial Aid was under one of its most testing periods given the situation within NSFAS, and the uncertainty that came with the election outcomes on the direction of the Department as a whole. We must also register the fact that we have seen an increase in the number of funders and sponsors. Through diligence, and hard work we have managed to inspire confidence, and as a result we have seen a return of many SETAs not only within faculties, but with the Fort Hare Foundation, and Financial Aid itself. While Financial Aid & Bursaries, Fort Hare Foundation, and certain Faculties have managed to argue for the scaling up of intake, this has been offset by the defunding crisis of NSFAS largely effected by wrong course codes.

 

When registration concluded, and the enrolment painted a picture of the highest intake in the history of the University largely due to a radical concessions document which we won after five tense meetings, and a brief shutdown and boycotting of registration for 3 - 5 days in both campuses. We proceeded to investigate how many students were funded and unfunded, and upon zooming in we discovered that we had close to four thousand unfunded students, with the bigger portion being postgraduates. We then found that most unfunded students were affected by course codes and began a process of rectifying them in a rapid manner, after making preliminary submissions to NSFAS in November 2023. The matter was said to be resolved in April 2024, and we realised in June 2024 after defunding started that this matter was still not resolved. We then pursued a radical programme of getting NSFAS and DHET to account, and in August 2024 we received a breakthrough with the year adjustments being made. We are now heading to the stage of ensuring that all students that were wrongfully defunded due to course codes receive their allowances. We are pushing NSFAS to fix the adjustments so that funding statuses change, and students can receive their long overdue money. We are also proud that we have permanently resolved the issue of course code across nineteen course codes across all faculties. We have provided a permanent solution to a longstanding problem. 

 

On enrolment, we have fared extremely well. We have ensured the institution surpasses its target, and ensured that approximately eighteen thousand students are registered, with East London Campus having a record number of approximately seven thousand six hundred and sixty-five students. This is the epitome of the spirit of Sizofunda Ngenkani and has become the permanent feature of the EFFSC in governance. We have managed to also secure spaces for seventy-one LLB students who were told the course is full, until we discovered that it was not, and an adjustment had to made. As we speak those students are registered with most of them having funding, while a few are affected by the dual registration issue which should be resolved in a matter of days. We have also scored a major success by ensuring that a cohort of Speech Therapy graduates and are accepted by HSPCA after degree accreditation issues which led to a public spat. We have also managed to ensure that students are not excluded for baseless reasons from graduation lists. 

 

The transport crisis has been a crisis which has been gripping the institution. The promise of ten buses came and went and never came to life. This has left us with the reality of an ailing fleeting and shrinking department in terms of staff configuration.  We are witnessing a department that is being gutted by corruption going through the pangs of reform. However, the lack of staffing is causing crises which lead to delays, and insufficient number of shuttles to carry students through. This has been a constant cry of students which we have carried through in meetings, however, the practical implementation from the said department has been lacking. Our call for the increase in the fleet, sale of the old fleet to generate cashflow, and to recoup some money has fallen on deaf ears, and corrupt hands which we saw being displayed in newspapers and tv news. We have witnessed the hard work, and the efforts being pilfered by crony staff members who have no interest in student welfare. We have nothing to say to them but let the law take its course! We also welcome the SIU investigation into the Institution, and we see this because of the constant noise we have made on corruption preceding our majority, and even in our majority status.

On policy and transformation, we managed to raise the issue of Charters of Institutional Committees being staff oriented. Fortunately, these charters are expiring, and our contestation is influenced and driven by the fact that we will have the chance to amend these charters towards more SRC and substructures of SRC representation. We are also driven by the fact that we will be able to resolve the deadlock emanating from the Prospectus committee which has failed to adopt a Prospectus for close to two years due to the challenge we made for more student representation. We have managed to produce a stalemate; however, we are noticing that the emergence of these new organisation is a sponsored ploy to undermine this policy battle for the soul of the institution. We are also proud of our contributions towards the amendment of the Gender Inclusivity Policy popularly known as the GBV policy. We have made proposals for a policy that is steeped in the realistic shift within the sector after the introduction of the NSFAS pilot project and the NSFAS transport/shuttle service project. We also made contributions that seek to uphold the principles of justice, and innocent until proven guilty.

 

Lastly, we have ensured maximum support is provided to the fledging women's soccer club, and the rugby squads. However, we note that for many other sporting codes largely based in East London Campus the experience has not been ideal. We hope to plug the gaps and rectify where it needs to be rectified. We also want to pursue a programme which shall see us integrate paralympic sporting codes even though that is an ambitious pipeline project within the framework of radically shifting the University of Fort Hare towards a progressive, inclusive, and revolutionary University. However, where we have excelled is in integrating minority groups, such as students living with disabilities, LGBQTIA+ community, and international students who could have felt othered if the environment was Afro phobic. We have ensured that we collaborated with the GBVP Unit, International Affairs, and the Disability Unit on programmes, even culminating into a fully-fledged programme for Students living with Disabilities titled I Am Able. We worked with the Student Governance & Development Unit to pioneer a Political Organisations & Society Induction to ensure we train future leaders and familiarise them with the processes. The exam prayers albeit with different conclusions also provided religious solace for students during a trying time of exams. Another development programme we seek to pursue is the Food Parcel Distribution programme for Unfunded Students due to us understanding the precarity of being unfunded. Due to the bureaucratic red tape, we have been gripped with delays whereas we requested this programme in April 2024! This slowness has been nothing but a politically motivated attack at this programme due to the fear that certain departments would be outshone by the SRC. We have noted this as an attack on the capacity of the EFFSC to deliver such programmes.

 

 

Political Terrain as we head to SRC Elections

During these achievements which I have briefly outlined, we have been plagued by internal conflict which stems from a gap that existed between the deployees and the BSTTs which led for the most part of the SRC term. This gap manifested in the lack of support from the leadership of the time, smear campaigns, and direct plots with the opposition to destabilise governance so that an impression can be created that the deployees in office are failing, thus paving a way forward for their recallment. These tendencies manifested themselves strongly towards the end of the first semester of the 2024 academic year, leading to the suspension of Fighter Yamkela Situnda from the SRC due to a concocted plot by former members of the EFFSC who are now contesting the Organization under the banner of another organisation which is mimicking the campaign of MKP. This political terrain developed from fact that the leadership of the time thought that the SRC Deployees were 'unaccountable', 'not radical enough', and 'generally incompetent' while the scorecard for the most part indicated another reality.  It is largely through a sponsored propaganda and distortion campaign whereby we have seen a shift in the political terrain towards an open contestation of the EFFSC. The split which we have seen must be identified as such since it is undeniable that these counterrevolutionaries once belonged to this political home of the dejected masses of the poor and the working class called the EFFSC. They fled after the upper structure disbanded them for abusing the constitution to purge deployees and collaborating with counterrevolutionary elements to undermine the victories of the EFFSC in governance. 

 

They then left with their supporters and followers who some have been naively caught in their web of lies, propaganda, and misinformation. Some even claim they are doing this to save the EFFSC, yet they are violating its constitution in the process. This is a flagrant departure from the Party, and a spit in the face of the Organisation and must be treated as such. There is no practical nor ideological perspective because their motive is solely based on careerist aspirations. They mostly consist of leaders who would never be considered for strategic leadership roles due to their anarchic characters, and their unwillingness to abide by the principles of democratic centralism. Here, we have students who have chosen to lead students to an amoeba of an organisation which has no form or shape but a stolen name and identity. They left because they refused to be disciplined, to be led, and to be guided by scientific politics and ideological perspectives steeped in Marxist-Leninist ideology because they wanted to do as they please with no guidance. The use of populism and attacking of EFFSC and SASCO has been their campaigning tool, and the distortion of the conditions and the cause thereof is a producing a divided student populace which is being distracted from the enemies; DHET, Management, and GNU. 

 

We have no option but to defend our good story, which is yet to be completed, and can only be completed by the defence of our gains against a management sponsored attack through the form of propaganda, and sponsored organisations which have no ideological imperative but to divide and kill the EFFSC, SASCO, PASMA, and DASO to usher in a liberal and individualistic, populist, and depoliticised Student governance terrain, in a highly political University.

Can we trust MKP? By Lindokuhle Mponco

Introduction

UMkhonto WeSizwe Party (MKP) emerged as a surprise package in the recent National elections which led to them polling at number three and netting over two million votes just on the national ballot alone. However, the arrival of MKP to the political scene has displace the EFF from the position it had held for ten years, and threatens its very existence, especially after the decimation of the support of the EFF in KZN, and the departure of the co-founder of the EFF who was serving as the Deputy President, Floyd Shivambu to the MKP. This announcement has sent shockwaves across the African Left, and the EFF as a Party has felt them the most. The departure of one of the most prominent members of the EFF and political twin of the President of the EFF, has led to the party going through the most testing period, and has led to an increased support and solidarity for Cde President Julius Malema.  Some CCT members have come out in the open to affirm their loyalty while some have been sulking in silence, silence so loud that it speaks volumes. However, in this article I will dialectically assess using dialectical and historical materialism whether can we trust the MKP as members and supporters of the EFF, or should we close the curtain on our short but tumultuous relationship.

What is the ideological character of the EFF juxtaposed to the MKP?

The EFF defines itself in its founding manifesto, and constitution as follows,

 

"(1) The Economic Freedom Fighters is an economic emancipation political movement which seeks to act in the interest of all South Africans, Africans and people of the world, striving for socialism and ECONOMIC EMANCIPATION IN OUR LIFETIME.

 

(2) The EFF takes socialism as the theoretical basis guiding its thinking and development of its political line and identifies itself as a MARXIST, LENINIST and FANONIAN organisation.

 

(3) The basic programme of the EFF is the complete overthrow of the neo liberal anti-black state as well as the bourgeoisie and all other exploiting classes, the establishment of the dictatorship of the people in place of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the triumph of socialism over capitalism. The ultimate aim of the EFF is the realisation of socialism through people’s power and the establishment of a state that responds to the needs of its people.

 

(4) The EFF is anti-capitalist, anti-racism, anti-sexist and anti-imperialist in its world outlook and is driven by sound democratic socialist values where the leadership is accountable to the members who elected it.

 

(5) The EFF is a vanguard mass organisation leading the revolutionary masses in the fight against the capitalist class enemy."

 

Therefore, the EFF defines itself as a Marxist-Leninist-Fanonian organisation which is in a class struggle against the ruling bourgeois class. The EFF defines itself as anti-neoliberal, anti-white supremacist, and pro-Dictatorship of the Proletariat, a mass vanguard party which seeks to attain socialism as a prelude to Communism. Thus, in the final sum of it all, the EFF views itself as a Communist Party which is steeped in mass democratic politics. The EFF does not leave one doubting on who they are, what they represent, whom they represent, and what is it that they seek to achieve in the long run. This has been consistently articulated by its leaders including our former leaders like Cde. Andile Mngxitama, and Cde. Floyd Shivambu.

 

The EFF in its 11 years of existence has consistently found itself in the thick of pro-working-class struggles. This led to a point whereby the EFF had to establish a labour desk and a gender desk to advance the struggle within the workplace and advance the struggle against gender inequality. These interventions have boosted the credentials of the EFF as a genuine Socialist party which seeks to realise a total defeat of all oppressor classes, and the establishment of Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The EFF throughout its lifespan has made it clear that elections are merely a tactic for it to gauge class consciousness, expose the hypocrisy of the bourgeoisie, and gain some necessary reforms for the oppressed classes within a liberal bourgeois democratic framework. The Socialism espoused by the EFF and its seven cardinal pillars are not that vastly different from the ten planks of Communism which were outlined in the Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels as follows,

 

"1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

 

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

 

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

 

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

 

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

 

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

 

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of wastelands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

 

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

 

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

 

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc."

 

The EFF makes it clear that the State they espouse is a state which is directed by the workers, and peasants with the land question being answered in the most inclusive way ever, State Custodianship. The concept of State Custodianship in a state led by an evidently Communist party takes a different form from State Custodianship in a Capitalist state or even a Feudal state. In this case, the State represents the majority (Proletarians and Peasants) who form the base of South African society. The aspirations of urban & rural workers and rural farm dwellers & subsistence farmers living under aristocrats represent the aspirations of the majority, who are the masses of our people (Proletarians & Peasants who are mainly black in general and African in particular). The aspiration of better working conditions, higher wages, profit sharing, agricultural support for emerging co-ops, and subsistence farmers, better land tenure rights in patriarchal aristocracies for women and sexual minorities, the democratic ownership, control, and management of the means of production, combatting of crime in working class communities, inner-city rejuvenation, and many other progressive demands will find expression in this State due to the class character of the Party, and the State which would be run by this Party, which in this scenario would be the EFF.

 

State Custodianship in as far as the land question is concerned therefore becomes a democratic means of controlling the wealth of the land. The people who are tasked to manage, administrate, and distribute this powerful resource will be democratically elected, and appointed by a democratic government which will be held accountable by the very same people whom the State would be representing in that scenario, which are the workers, and peasants. Thus, State Custodianship becomes the most accessible, most open, and most class inclusive method of answering the land question. The proposition of Land Councils would enhance and democratise the system of land boards and trusts which are run by capitalists, aristocrats, and their puppets who constantly distort rural development, instead of advancing development which will seek to eradicate the divide between the urban and rural areas. The EFF espouses such a society due to its ideological orientation, and its ideological framework which is consistent with the revolutionary character of the most revolutionary class in our capitalist society, the Proletarians (Working Class).

 

However, when we juxtapose this with the character of the MKP, we find that MKP has no publicly available constitution whether interim or adopted in a gathering. Their electoral manifesto is the only document which we can derive a sense of identity or what is it that MKP represents. In their manifesto, they make it clear that they are pro-Nationalisation while making it clear on the land question that they seek to return the land to the custodianship of the traditional rulers (Kings and Chiefs). Land being the base of any economy according to MKP must be kept in the hands of aristocrats, which is basically Neo-Feudalism. However, we must understand that this Neo-Feudalist aspiration is not necessarily according to a strictly Eurocentric line or approach to feudalism but steeped in what Marx and Engels characterised as Feudal-Socialism due to aristocrats being expropriated by the bourgeoisie and the capitalist system in general. Marx and Engels characterised Feudal-Socialism in the Communist Manifesto as follows, 

 

"In order to arouse sympathy, the aristocracy was obliged to lose sight, apparently, of its own interests, and to formulate their indictment against the bourgeoisie in the interest of the exploited working class alone. Thus, the aristocracy took their revenge by singing lampoons on their new masters and whispering in his ears sinister prophesies of coming catastrophe. In this way arose feudal Socialism: half lamentation, half lampoon; half an echo of the past, half menace of the future; at times, by its bitter, witty and incisive criticism, striking the bourgeoisie to the very heart’s core; but always ludicrous in its effect, through total incapacity to comprehend the march of modern history. The aristocracy, to rally the people to them, waved the proletarian alms-bag in front for a banner. But the people, so often as it joined them, saw on their hindquarters the old feudal coats of arms and deserted with loud and irreverent laughter."

 

They further say this about the rise of Feudal-Socialism,

 

 "In pointing out that their mode of exploitation was different to that of the bourgeoisie, the feudalists forget that they exploited under circumstances and conditions that were quite different and that are now antiquated. In showing that, under their rule, the modern proletariat never existed, they forget that the modern bourgeoisie is the necessary offspring of their own form of society. For the rest, so little do they conceal the reactionary character of their criticism that their chief accusation against the bourgeois amounts to this, that under the bourgeois regime a class is being developed which is destined to cut up root and branch the old order of society. What they upbraid the bourgeoisie with is not so much that it creates a proletariat as that it creates a revolutionary proletariat. In political practice, therefore, they join in all coercive measures against the working class; and in ordinary life, despite their high-falutin phrases, they stoop to pick up the golden apples dropped from the tree of industry, and to barter truth, love, and honour, for traffic in wool, beetroot-sugar, and potato spirits." 

 

What Marx and Engels expose about the historical relationship between the Bourgeoisie, Aristocracy, Proletarians, and Peasants is that in a bid for the Aristocracy to survive, it will use slogans, rhetoric, and ideas that link with the struggle of the proletarians, and the peasantry against the now dominant Bourgeoisie to merely arouse sympathy for itself. MKP has used this effectively not only in written word as Marx and Engels experienced in their time, but through practical campaigning and contestation of power within the liberal bourgeois framework of democracy. The working class in KZN, parts of Mpumalanga, and Gauteng cast their votes for MKP because of the slogans which it advanced which seemed to link its fight with the interests of the working class (proletarians) while maintaining its strong support for the Zulu monarchy, and many other aristocrats within these areas. Their manifesto seeks to create a parliamentary democracy which will have monarchs from across the ethnicities of South Africa as overlords. This is no different to the arrangement in the UK, Lesotho, and many other constitutional monarchies across the world. What MKP aspires to achieve is a socialism which is directed and controlled by the aristocrats for the benefit of the aristocrats, while creating an impression that it has the interests of the oppressed classes in South Africa (Proletarians and Peasants). 

 

The MKP seeks to restore the relations of the past while adapting them to the modern era of where democracies are found everywhere and anywhere. These relations as Marx and Engels allude in the Communist Manifesto have been antiquated by time and will never return to their prime state as espoused by this Feudal-Socialist tendency. The march of history has moved so far ahead that many South Africans across different sections of the country including in areas dominated by aristocrats ask themselves the question, 'Are monarchies still relevant within the democratic framework?', while some ask whether democracy is a viable tool to actualise development. This dialectical reality of aristocratic leadership living side-by-side with a liberal bourgeois democratic system will eventually lead to the negation of one or the other, and it is most likely going to be the aristocracy that will die out should the relationship become antagonistic. However, our history has proven time and time again that the bourgeoisie has always had a way to capture the aristocracy and use it for its benefit. As we speak, MKP operates within a system where aristocrats are subordinates to the bourgeoisie. The MKP seeks to overturn that while pretending to care for the proletarians and the peasants. 

 

Can MKP be an ally of the EFF?

Besides the historical ties of the leaders of both parties (Most of them come from the structures of the ANC, an ideological broad-church) which has somewhat tactically blindsided the EFF, the difference is fundamental. We must remember that Lenin teaches us that nationalisation as a concept is not necessarily socialist. The modern example of this is the fact that most central banks are fully owned by the State, but you will find that most of these States are capitalist states. These national instruments owned by the state exert capitalist policy and capitalist pressure. Lenin in one of his many texts and articles which I cannot pinpoint now makes an example of how the nationalisation of land enables capital to freely and rapidly develop with little hinderance. An example of this is the island of Singapore. The land in Singapore is owned by the State, but the relations of production are capitalist. Therefore, just because a certain party is chanting the slogan of nationalisation it does not mean that they seek to nationalise for the benefit of the majority, but it could be for the benefit of the ruling class. As we can already see, the SOEs in South Africa while providing services to the public, are controlled by private players. Thus, the SOEs don't necessarily benefit the people but the capitalists. 

 

In MKP's articulations, there has been no indication that MKP seeks to nationalise for the benefit of the motive forces of the revolution (workers and peasants), but it rather leaves it to the prospective voter to decide what it means to them. This is no different to the founder of MKP, Jacob Zuma declaring Free Education, while not announcing modalities of such, and leaving large swathes of students outside of the system of NSFAS. The MKP has provided vague answers to the questions posed by the masses of our people, thus leaving us revolutionary Marxists with a simple question, can MKP be an ally of the EFF? The question can be summarily answered as follows, no! MKP's fundamental political outlook on the socio-political and socio-economic direction cannot be married with the outrightly Marxist character of the EFF. The differences are irreconcilable, and class based. The MKP represents the disgruntled upstart capitalist, petty bourgeois, and aristocratic faction which has made it their duty to weaken the EFF by poaching prominent EFF leaders by either dangling the proverbial carrot or promising them power that they crave. Not only can we cite the poaching while claiming to be part of the Progressive Caucus, and being a signatory of the Progressive Charter, but their stance on the land question leaves much to be desired. 

 

The MKP is clearly at odds with the EFF, and these differences are finally simmering to the fore. The gaslighting on social media by MKP to the reactions of Fighters to the departure of Cde. Floyd Shivambu is typical of how the political principal of the MKP operates; he strikes you while smiling at you and with you! Furthermore, the MKP represents a coalition of corruption accused who have a case to answer in some respects while it harbours Zuma loyalists who benefitted politically and materially during the tenure of Jacob Zuma as President of the ANC and South Africa. This to many revolutionaries is not something we must openly embrace or turn a blind eye to. We must see it for what it is, an attack on the EFF that led the campaign to remove their beloved leader and dislocate their patronage network! The Party has to ensure that the road to the 3rd National People's Assembly is not filled with potholes created by internal saboteurs whose loyalties lie with MKP,  but it must ensure that internally there is open criticism of these tendencies, and facilitating an environment where there will be BPAs (Branch People's Assemblies), BGAs (Branch General Assemblies), RGAs (Regional General Assemblies), and PGAs (Provincial General Assemblies) that will address this question leading up to the National People's Assembly.

 

We must objectively analyse the space so that we can locate our true allies and continue to foster strong relations with them while maintaining our identity as a truly Marxist-Leninist-Fanonian Party which seeks to achieve Socialism in our lifetime. Lenin once said, 

 

"Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism." 

 

It is very important for us to choose our allies wisely. We must not ally with those that who distort or oppose Marxism, but with those that share our ideas, and agree with the basic tenets of Marxism, while forming a united front with those who share the progressive vision of negating the ruling class and neoliberalism, not those who poach our members in the cover of the dark night!