South Africa’s democracy, a part of a global phenomenon, is in crisis. In the wake of the 2024 general election and more than 8 months into the established South African Government of National Unity (GNU), there are prevailing questions around the country’s future. It often seems unclear where the next few years will lead and while some see the GNU as a step in the right direction – particularly in addressing the abuse of power – there are those who, overwhelmingly remain apathetic, dissatisfied and disillusioned. But as we strive to reignite the principles of democracy, what lessons can we learn?
Democracies are strengthened and legitimised by the participation of a robust civil society. Within the Political Sciences, ‘participation’ refers to the activities, by civil society groups and individuals, that influence policy and the quality of democracy. This can include participation in state-regulated or ‘invited’ participatory mechanisms like voting in elections, referendums, public consultation forums and working with or in political parties. Despite a discursive skew towards the aforementioned, participation can also include those ‘invented’ and unconventional spaces for civic participation, such as protests, boycotts, social movements and community-based organisations.
Many of the tensions surrounding the state of South Africa’s democracy have focused on governmental reform with little reflection into the ways citizens have steered the process of democratisation and consolidated the quality of their democracy. Civil society actors have historically been pivotal in the imagining of political alternatives. Without provoking the idea of citizens’ resilience – often framed within a neoliberal scapegoat-ing of those institutions that ought to be working for the people – recentering participation beyond rhetoric may be a redeeming point for South Africa’s democracy.
Source: Thompson, 2013, in Mavee 2015
Participation in South African democracy, in line with its liberal values, is entirely voluntary. There is no conscription, no forceful mandate instructing citizens to vote, talk politics, run a community-based organisation, etc. However, South Africa has culturally embedded sentiments on what citizens ought to do, how socio-political matters should be addressed and who within society must act on these matters. From President Cyril Ramaphosa’s 2018 #ThumaMina, Send Me campaign— which inspired patriotism and acts of kindness well into the COVID-19 lockdown— to the symbolic significance of a thumb marked with black on voting day, political societies cultivate and sustain value systems that are culturally constructed. However, the extent and nature of citizens’ participation remain a matter of personal choice.
Despite much of the discourse on citizens’ political participation being shaped by government-created participatory spaces, a civil society-centred perspective reveals how civil society itself plays a crucial role in inventing and shaping these spaces. However, South Africa experienced what has been described as a transition from ‘comrades to citizens‘ through the 1996 post-apartheid Public Participation model. This shift was marked by the introduction of state-sanctioned and institutionalised participatory mechanisms aimed at decentralising power, establishing public consultation platforms, and ensuring free and fair elections. Although these invited political spaces had merits for strengthening democracy, they also led to the demobilisation of many civic organisations.
It has become increasingly difficult for ordinary citizens to engage effectively in politics (see Civicus article). For South Africa, the remaining activities are weakened in the context of struggles for resources, threats, intimidation and fatigue. Public consultative processes have also acted as ‘tick-box exercises’ with limited influence on policy, particularly for the poor. This, along with a low eligible voter turnout, presents an important question around the role of South Africa’s citizenry. Despite the dominant narrative linking apathy to a lack of education, hopelessness and anti-patriotism, a critical review of apathy can reveal aspects of lived realities (e.g. a lack of relevant resources, state bureaucracy, distrust and disillusionment, etc.) that contribute to political disengagement. Apathy, in itself, may represent a longing and can, within a point of disavowal, act as a potential site for the creation of a new identity for South Africa’s civil society.
Discussing the need for a “new political centre” in South Africa, Mcedisi Jonas argues that:
“[t]he GNU will not succeed if it is left to be an elite pact between political parties and their corporate partners. […] What innovative, 21st-century process of democratic engagement and consensus-building can we create? This is essential if we are to build momentum behind a fresh and compelling vision for growth and change.”
There have been useful examples of how to foster active citizenship while upholding the liberal values enshrined in the Constitution. These have all relied heavily on education and have avoided the heavy-handed approach of national service policies. However, South Africa has weakly conceived the political role of its citizenry beyond a ‘learn your rights and responsibilities’ class in primary school, virtue signalling and the occasional reminder to vote when election season approaches. Rather, political identities need to be curated and mainstreamed through all curricula as part of a life-long learning process. If South Africa’s democracy is to be truly reimagined during this time of crisis, there needs to be a deconstruction of civil society’s identity, a review of its apathy and, upon critical reflection of its grievances, an intentional creation and support of a new political identity.
