DEMOCRATIC Alliance leader John Steenhuisen congratulates Cyril Ramaphosa following his election as President of South Africa in Cape Town on Friday June 14, 2024. The DA’s resistance to progressive policies, along with governance that favours wealthier communities, is reversing the gains of liberation and perpetuating a structure of privilege that reflects South Africa’s fractured past, says the writer. Picture: GCIS
Dr. Reneva Fourie
WHEN South Africans raise their voices against corruption, maladministration and poor service delivery, they do not necessarily endorse the Democratic Alliance (DA) or any other political party.
Instead, their demands for accountability embody a powerful aspiration for ethical governance, administrative efficiency and adherence to shared national values. These values include non-racialism, non-sexism and the pursuit of a united South Africa, where the benefits of the country’s wealth are equitably distributed among all its citizens.
This dynamic is evident in recent elections, where dissatisfaction with the African National Congress (ANC) has not translated into substantial support for the DA. Many South Africans chose to abstain from voting rather than support the opposition. Among those who participated in the elections, only 21 per cent voted for the DA, highlighting the challenges the party faces in garnering broader electoral support.
The ANC-headed Alliance has played a pivotal role in the struggle against colonialism and apartheid, leaving an indelible mark on South African society. For many, it symbolises liberation and the promise of a brighter future. This deep emotional connection often leads citizens to remain loyal to the liberation movement, even amidst gradual dissatisfaction with its governance performance.
Conversely, many South Africans are sceptical of the DA, doubting its ability to address the country’s historical injustices and socio-economic disparities. Despite its efforts to present itself as a diverse and inclusive party, the DA is often perceived as a champion of privilege. The party’s policies, actions and inclination towards ethnic-based decentralisation cement this perception.
South Africa is one of the most unequal societies globally, a direct consequence of apartheid-era policies that systematically marginalised black people while consolidating wealth and resources within the white minority. Although there has been a slight change in class demographics, the entrenched economic structures of the past persist. Genuine economic transformation demands bold policies that effectively tackle these disparities. However, the DA’s strategy for economic reform exhibits a clear reluctance to adopt meaningful redistribution measures.
The DA’s economic policies are firmly rooted in neoliberal principles, prioritising privatisation, free markets and fiscal austerity. While these approaches may seem appealing, they are fundamentally flawed as they prioritise the interests of capital over the needs of the majority, effectively marginalising those excluded from substantial economic participation. In a nation where wealth remains concentrated in the hands of a select few, this strategy only serves to deepen existing inequalities.
The DA’s adherence to pro-capital economic policies reveals a significant deficiency in its commitment to addressing the structural barriers black South Africans face in accessing meaningful economic opportunities. By rejecting affirmative action, the DA conceals its reluctance to implement necessary measures to rectify historical injustices under the guise of meritocracy. While meritocracy and non-discriminatory practices hold their value, the persistent unemployment and poverty statistics starkly highlight the enduring privileges of the past, making it imperative to pursue effective redress.
Moreover, the DA’s interpretation of meritocracy reinforces historical advantages rather than dismantling them. In the Western Cape, where the DA holds substantial power, the demographic composition of senior administrators inadequately reflects the diversity of the broader population, with white leadership continuing to dominate.
Additionally, the DA’s position on land reform has been quite telling. The party often justifies its opposition to this policy by emphasising the importance of protecting property rights and bolstering investor confidence. However, this rationale appears to be a deliberate strategy aimed at preserving the economic advantages held by those who benefited from apartheid-era wealth. While the DA may endorse some limited market-based redistribution initiatives, it consistently rejects radical reforms necessary to tackle the deep-seated inequalities in land ownership. This approach aligns with affluent landlord’s interests and has stymied progress in rectifying spatial inequality.
Cape Town has the highest number of Airbnbs globally, with over 23,000 listings. Unfortunately, the majority of these rentals benefit wealthy property owners. This situation is particularly alarming as Cape Town has a significant housing shortage. Low-income families are increasingly forced into overcrowded informal settlements or pushed to the outskirts of the city, far away from job opportunities and essential services. The surge of short-term rentals in central neighbourhoods is driving up property prices and exacerbating a housing crisis in a city plagued by inequality and a severe lack of affordable social housing.
When it comes to service delivery, studies have shown that DA-run municipalities tend to allocate more resources to wealthier areas under the guise of maintaining “world-class” services. Informal settlements and historically black townships often receive inadequate attention, perpetuating apartheid-era patterns of neglect. Its recent objections to the Basic Education Law Amendment Act and National Health Insurance confirm its determination to maintain apartheid-era divides in education and healthcare. At a foreign policy level, it openly champions the interests of Western imperialism, guided by its regular engagements with American and British diplomats.
The inability of the DA to project itself as representative of the South African population is most glaringly evident in its leadership structure. The departures of prominent figures such as Lindiwe Mazibuko, Mmusi Maimane and Herman Mashaba have been widely seen as a clear sign of the party’s inability to pursue fundamental transformation. The wave of resignations stemmed from disagreements about the party’s direction, with claims that its core leadership is hesitant to adopt policies prioritising racial equity.
The DA has misleadingly positioned itself as the ultimate solution to South Africa’s challenges. In truth, the party’s resistance to progressive policies, along with governance that favours wealthier communities, is reversing the gains of liberation and perpetuating a structure of privilege that reflects South Africa’s fractured past. The reluctance of many South Africans to support the DA signifies a profound yearning for a political landscape that aligns with the vision of a united, inclusive and prosperous South Africa. This desire for unity encapsulates a broader vision where diversity is celebrated, and every individual has the opportunity to flourish, irrespective of their background.
* Dr Reneva Fourie is a policy analyst specialising in governance, development and security.
** The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of The African