What does the EFF offer of vote to DA really say?
The August 3, 2016 Municipal Elections have come and gone, we have lived through two weeks of anxiously awaited coalition talks, agreements, jet-setting in bargaining of parties on what they consider important. With an impending deadline on properly constituted councils looming large in expiry of 24hours municipalities since last week have begun to finalise their councils.
Today the DA speaker candidate Vasco Da Gama is confirmed with a victory of 145 – 126 beating the ANC’s Constance Bapela candidacy. We are eagerly awaiting the Mayoral voting outcome between incumbent Parks Tau and Herman Mashaba, by all indications the vote will go the same as what we have seen with the Speaker.
The EFF has dispatched its second in charge Floyd Shivambu to ensure a repeat of the Rustenburg Municipality vote outcome does not occur. I think the EFF is not as united as its leadership wants to advance. I would not be surprised if some EFF voters who voted for the DA Speaker will switch their votes and god with Parks Tau. Don’t forget the EFF wanted to force the IEC to accept it can vote and show whom they voted for, meaning they must be using this as a means to ensure betrayal does not take place. It tried to push that through as tactic arguing those who oppose can after the elections raise their concerns.
In the aftermath of the coalition discussions, deals and trading it is perhaps time to ask how clever was the EFF deal in not entering with the DA into a full blown coalition but opted to give its vote where its needed against the ANC. A coalition government we are told is a cabinet of parliamentary government in which several political parties cooperate, reducing the dominance of any one party within that coalition. The usual reason for this arrangement is that no party on its own can achieve a majority in the parliament.
An agreement as defined by the dictionary is harmony or accordance in opinion or feeling. It may also attest the absence of incompatibility between two things or a consistency.
A week ago, the EFF had chosen an open veld in the sprawling Alexandra Township to share with South Africa the outcomes of their coalition talks with essentially the ANC and the DA. The press statement concluded with SA hearing the EFF has failed to secure their 8 (essentially non municipal related) items with the ANC and thus they have opted for the DA with whom there are more consensuses. The EFF leader was quick to point out that they do have grave problems with the DA’s Mayoral Candidate of Herman Mashaba particularly for disparaging, irregular and thoughtless comments the ‘Black Like Me’, business man made about the poor, and by extension black people.
We heard that the EFF refused to do a proper coalition but entered a loose agreement in which it will vote for the DA against the ANC. They claim they not bedfellows but the DA has its vote.
It is here that I wish to postulate is the agreement of the EFF not a stronger deal in favour of the DA than the coalition agreements other parties entered with the DA?
At a surface and emotional level we heard the EFF does not want any positions, it believes it must be voted in as a government to appoint its people, not trade a for positions as a result of hung councils. At surface level this sounds a very noble and gallant stance yet it’s perhaps devoid of how politics as praxis is actualized.
What is the EFF saying by giving its vote to the DA?
- Firstly by willingly giving their hand (vote) to the DA after being approached by the DA, the EFF confirmed a traditional male dominant – female inferior patriarchal notion and status of a young bride. This occurs in the month we pause to celebrate women and a democratic era where equality of gender is non negotiable. Yet the EFF in endorsing this archaic patriarchal society where male dominance rule, takes us all back in time where we simply left ages ago.
- If we go back to the accepted definition of the word agreement, then the EFF shares ‘harmony or accordance in opinion or feeling’ with the DA. We must therefore ask what is the harmony or accordance in opinion or feeling? Maybe I can venture to say the harmony and accord of the EFF and the DA, is informed by a common agreement of anything but the ANC.
- Thus the EFF with this agreement did not respect its claimed ideological stance; in fact it showed how flimsy its claimed ideological footprint is, for it was easily sacrificed at the table of anti-ANC punishment.
- It equally confirmed its androgynous suspicious policy footprint. We all know the EFF is high on tactics to hog attention but low on policy input. Thus any relationship entered with a dominant policy footprint one, will confirm this known policy weakness on the part of the EFF.
- The EFF in offering its vote to the DA, proverbially confirmed a marriage of convenience for the dominant partner in this vat-en-sit (a male and female partnership of no commitments) union, where the EFF signs what the senior double dating and philandering DA proposes. It involuntarily reminded me of the status of custom marriages under apartheid firstly they were not legal; secondly it had no legal standing as it relates to claim on the part of the woman. Thirdly the male figure was the dominant and only true decision-maker in the arrangement.
Often the woman derived an identity, essence and meaning in finality from being married to the dominant male.
- Thus it can be argued the EFF’s agreement, is perhaps a short-sighted and ill-conceived idea because it expresses a desire to offer its most prized possession, the vote, to someone it does not really like or is in love with. It can be argued short-sighted because as teenager, gets angry and reaches a place of hate for his parent, so the EFF is angry with the ANC. This anger drives her into the arm of a much older modern blesser, who is in agreement with the teenager that her parent is an enemy and simply not good. The result is the teenager shares a room and a bed and sheets with the older philandering avuncular blesser.
- It says the EFF is less concerned or interested in the accepted and acknowledged good work as confirmed as confirmed by even EFF leadership, exemplified in programmes, initiatives and trajectory for a transformed and spatially readjusted city region that was done and is being done for example in city of Johannesburg.
- The EFF with their offer to vote for the DA confirmed the anger of blindness to punish the ANC. With this offer of votes the EFF says our anger is more important than what the voters decided, our personalised anger stands paramount and has pre-eminence.
- By willingly giving their vote to the DA, the EFF despite raising justifiable challenges with the DA on its candidate Herman Mashaba a fundamental aspect, confirmed its junior status to kow-tow to the instruction of the DA as male dominant final voice on the subject matter.
- The EFF has confirmed its youthfulness and innocence to the world of coalition politics of governance.
What does this arrangement mean for the DA?
- The willingness of the EFF to offer itself in voting sense confirmed the dominant male status of the DA in this union, agreement or however defined. It proverbially confirms the dominant apartheid male status of the DA, though in era of democracy.
- It also means, the DA will rise to power in places where the voters did not entrust them to lead. In the City of Johannesburg this is glaring, The DA secured only 38% of the vote. This is a clear confirmation that the DA is not the trusted party by far. Yet the EFF will ensure it obtains that much desired leadership.
- It says on another level to the DA, that it can stop, stymie retard the current functional programmes and legacy initiatives for it has the blessing of an angry EFF to undo the very accepted good work.
- This deal at another level says the DA is in charge and their policy will take precedence, particularly if the DA can find a away to structure it to remotely sound the opposite of the ANC. As long as they can hold the ANC up as the enemy the EFF will sign all the papers with their vote.
- It furthermore says to the DA, you can share in the proverbial virgin choice collations of marriage. Because the EFF is the junior and the virgin bride in this marriage, the DA is an old hand at having affairs and has a married a number of other women. Do not forget the Patricia De Lille’s ID whom it chained, it smooched Ramphele’s Aganang to death, it had flings with Lekota’s COPE and even chased after an uncircumcised yet to be made a man Vavi because it saw potential. Not to mention all the one night stands in many places and hotels, formula ones a cross the length and breadth of SA. We cannot forget these include amongst others ACDP, FF and many others not known.
- Now in this season this old hand, this skirt-chasing lusty DA enters its most hostile yet affair, but the DA has tamed this one too, because without the nagging legal agreement of marriage. The DA laughs because it got the EFF votes and they did nothing to earn it, they just need to be anti-ANC, for you are not kept accountable by this loose vat–en-sit arrangement as desired by the EFF.
- You can have access to the choicest possession of this your girlfriend; she does not want a marriage, because she offered herself for your pleasure. Her only condition you must just dislike her parent.
I foresee a bumpy ride, as this vat-en-sit arrangement or case will end up in the public court of divorce. It would not be surprising, as this marriage grows older day by day that the EFF voters as they have begun to show, raise their voices in displeasure against their leaders who had entered into this bad deal.
Clyde N.S Ramalaine