Malema the end- ANCYL a divided house?

He came he saw and was slain. The recent mutterings on the in-fights amongst ANCYL executive leadership attest to the reality of politics and confirms the now well known slogan, “there are no permanent enemies nor permanent friends in politics”.

If newspaper reports are correct, the tussle for the new president of the ANCYL and its supposed new vision is mounting. The question is how did ANCYL get to this now slain status of it’s once vocal or should I say feared Malema leadership. The Malema leadership was never not under dispute from the onset, it was never a leadership without acrimony.

Consistent accusations claims and counter claims of vote rigging, his dictatorial attitude by which he offloaded provincial leaderships, individuals and those he saw as enemies. Malema did not get to the proverbial smaller Mount Everest of ANCYL leadership as a natural choice but he fought his way to that summit. The signs of the fighting and maneuvering was seen in conferences becoming events of shame, where naked bums were on display, hotels left in squabbles, damaged to property was reported and Provinical structures left in polarized context. Let us not  forget the likes of  a Reuben Masoga who was read the riot act by arbiter Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe who effectively dealt with him when he threatened to go to court.

I guess I am trying to say to understand the unraveling ANCYL leadership contestation today is to understand this Malema leadership had some cheap glue keeping it’s parts together and anyone that knows would have anticipated at some time with some heat would let  the glue melt and prove a fractured picture of such claimed unity. Regardless to how united and brave a face Malema and his Executive shown on the last press statement, those who know is it clear the ANCYL  Executive is a divided house, and with provincial teams showing disdain it is clear Malema can not count on a unified ANCYL.

Malema’ s vocal claims in the wake of his proverbial red- carding as we already said was no sign of power but a sign of weakness as a severely wounded “General” who has his entire combatants already shackled and tied up in enemy control, cry “let us take them on”. Who was Malema really calling for as the proverbial wounds begin to show in emboldened blood pouring political death? He was shouting into an abyss of nothing and nowhere, he was calling into a dark pit of rhetorical retort. His was a call into a valley of the slain. By the time he called he did so from a make belief rally of UNISA Press briefing his “troops” already were canvassing their personal political ambitions sold the concept that Malema is history and you can have a future, “why tie yourself to a proverbial dead horse?” Such is the context and meaning of politics in praxis that there are no permanent enemies not friends.

Saying Malema and the co-suspended executive ANCYL have recourse is to say they have a constitutional right enshrined to appeal. It is therefore to be expected that the ANCYL briefing set for today as promised will outline the reasons for appeal, citing the process as flawed, intent on the part of the NDC. One may expect as was seen already that a case will be made that the the disciplinary hearing was a witchhunt that was premised on villification and intent. It is to be expected that individuals making up the NDC, will be highlighted to argue for the ‘victims’ disenfranchisement. The ANCYL will use the 2012 elective conference as the base for their appeal.

Yet having cited all of this, the question that needs answering on the part of the ANCYL is if they knew the process was this flawed why did they not upfront state and argue such, but to submit this now to when you already have subjected yourself to such NDC not once but twice in the case of Malema is simply not making sense. Malema will contend that they are victims of a campaign. Malema will argue that the unseen forces are dictators yet Malema himself is known to be a dictator if the views of some in ANCYL embrace is true. Malema has attacked the ANC and it’s leaders even more now than ever before, does this press briefing not justify a new case for disciplinary action?

The argument is can this so called united face being presented today by the ANCYL serves as a temporal glue to keep it together when the ANCYL house is divided? Perhaps the best way to see this press briefing is to argue, it is the last argument as Malema is fading on the horizon of the political canvas for it is my view that the ANCYL is a divided house, that the very ANCYL leadership members are at each others throats.

Perhaps for me as I have consistently argued that the bigger casualty is the critical issue of Economic Redress, which is a rigtful overdue and correct debate. Such economic redress is not a political football as both the ANCYL, ANC and all with vested interests have sought to reduce the subject to. Malema in my books remains the by- default face of such economic redress though he abused the trust this rightful quest thrust upon him by proving cheap and having clay feet as one who preach one thing but live something else. His Ratanang Trust is our rightful economic redress’ undoing. His penchant for the very apartheid based economy offerings prove our debate as soluble. Malema and all those who want us to see the economic redress as a individual namely Malema, has done our claim a disservice, yet we must thank him and the ANCYL for having tabled the subject.

Perhaps as the dust is settling now, the fact that a claim is made that that the ANCYL constitution was altered in the wake of a suspecting suspense for there are those who claim this issue of Constitutional Amendment never served in the 24th ANCYL conference, yet there are others who out of emotional loyalty will argue it did serve. be that as it may, in my books this will sink Malema into history for he came he saw and was slain.

In conclusion I still contend, Malema came he saw and he was slain and as the days continue he will be a fading shot star that tried to prove larger than the organization who has a very long history. Until then we should expect rumblings in the ANCYL context for it is not held together in sanguine unity but with a cheap glue, to be eroded at anytime.

Bishop Clyde N. Ramalaine
Independent Observer