By Nontlantla Skenjana

Democracy, patriotism and ethics are generally taken as clichés, often used in the same sentence.  Many raise the concern that patriotism goes against democracy as it puts the nation or institution before self, which is rather limiting to one’s freedom to choose what to support and what to oppose.

The other thought is that ethics are an indoctrination of what you regard as being good and right. This could have adverse implications for democracy as it also brings about judgement rather than choice.

Emma Goldman, in her anarchist philosophy says: “Patriotism ... is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit.”

This responds to the philosophy that when one is patriotic to an institution, they must protect that institution no matter what. Goldman argues that in that case one would be working against his/her own principles therefore robbing one of his/her self-respect.

In Marxist-Leninist literature, there is something called democratic centralism which says that in an organisation, there will be a space for all to discuss and the final decision of the majority will bind the minority as if it was a consensus. Furthermore, the decision of higher institutional structures will bind that of lower structures. That would mean that one would have to support the decision publicly despite their internal opposition.

For example, as a principle, one might hold the view that war of any kind is wrong. However, when he or she joins parliament and a war is approved, then he or she would have to defend that decision in public. One is compelled to take a position that they do not necessarily agree with and may find repugnant.

Republican senator from 1949-1973, Margaret Chase Smith said: “Moral cowardice that keeps us from speaking our minds is as dangerous to this country as irresponsible talk. The right way is not always the popular and easy way. Standing for right when it is unpopular is a true test of moral character.” She was advocating for the triumph of ethics regardless of what kind of opposition you are getting. This may require going against the democratic principle of majority rule.

These terms are currently central to the political discourse in the country. As we move towards elections, for what its worth, some organisations are saying they are more democratic, others are promoting patriotism whilst others are promoting ethical leadership.

For instance, the UDM believes that democracy would be better entrenched if the country would call an indaba that would determine the economic ideology that should be followed and furthermore there should be a referendum on the death penalty.

On the other hand, there is the ANC urging people to protect the gains that have been made this far and vote for the party that has always been there. It is making a pitch for patriotism to the organisation.

COPE, on the other hand, is focussing on morality and the need for ethical leadership, emphasising issues such as respect for the Constitution, involvement of faith-based institutions, public declarations by civil servants relating to business interests and criminal records and the principle that leadership must be exemplary.

One man once said that the enemy of right is not always bad, but its biggest enemy is good. Put differently, one may be good but wrong while one may be bad but right. Who then becomes good and right is dependent on the factors one will consider in their analysis.

Assessing the above organisations, one may say the UDM is right for advocating democracy, but the UDM has had one president since its inception, is it because there are no other credible leaders in the UDM? Secondly, while the party supports democracy, it dabbling in the tricky matter of the death penalty muddies the waters.

The ANC on the other hand, too sees itself as an organisation for the people and calls itself a “broad church where you find witches and witchdoctors”. It also alludes to the fact that it is always open for debate, encouraging member patriotism, yet the people who supported Thabo Mbeki pre-Polokwane have been replaced using the excuse of wanting to enhance unity and delivery. It is said that the ANC is the one that leads, not the individual. Yet the leader of the Youth League is prepared to take up arms and be led from prison by Jacob Zuma, an individual. Is this then what patriotism is about?

COPE is an organisation which was formed by ANC dissidents, of whom the primary faction is a group of people who had hoped to be elected to the party’s highest decision-making body, the NEC, and were unsuccessful or rather not placed as they had hoped.

Have they done our democracy a service by forming a new party and walking away from the ‘majority’? Looking at the COPE election manifesto, there is hardly anything that is different from what the ANC says. The major campaigning point for COPE is the ethical angle which unfortunately is very qualitative and cannot be easily measured nor enforced.

Democracy does not preclude patriotism and ethics. Many patriots have been rebellious in the name of democracy and many ethical people have stood against their principles due to democracy. At the same time, many democrats have stood against their ethics and the spirit of patriotism.

Whether one is a patriot, ethical or democratic is based on his/her own personal convictions and cannot be imposed on others. What sets one apart will be the ability to convince and mobilise others around those convictions.

References
www.anc.org.za
www.congressofthepeople.org.za
www.udm.org.za
www.thinkexist.com

The Transformer Vol. 15 No. 1 / February - March 2009