JUSTICE MALALA | The racist kind of criticism that has been levelled at Ramaphosa is horrendous

President Cyril Ramaphosa gets criticised a lot, as he should be. He is, after all, our commander-in-chief. The buck stops with him. The fact that unemployment is worse today than it was when he ascended to power in 2018 is his responsibility and he must bear that burden. Rampant crime, widening inequality and heartbreaking poverty — all these have worsened on his watch.

Sure, we had the global Covid-19 pandemic and that was a huge setback for his state renewal and economic reform programme. But the whole world faced that crisis. Many have bounced back from the impact of the pandemic and the shutdowns of the 2020s.

There is, however, a disgusting, horrendous, invidious and racist kind of criticism that has been levelled at Ramaphosa and some of his comrades. It has been going on for years, in a subliminal manner, but it has taken on an overt nature now that Ramaphosa continues to outmanoeuvre his opponents inside the ANC, in the MK party, in the EFF and elsewhere.

For years now Ramaphosa has been labelled a “running dog of capital”. Since his triumph over Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma (who was a proxy for the scandal-soaked ex-president, Jacob Zuma) at the ANC conference in December 2017, he has constantly been accused of speaking for and acting on behalf of “white monopoly capital”. It does not escape me that this is a term that came into vogue when it was resuscitated by the corrupt Gupta family’s London propagandists, who worked for the furtherance of Jacob Zuma’s cause.

Even as he signed the National Health Insurance bill — an anti-business piece of legislation if ever there was one — into law last month, Ramaphosa was still being accused of being a lackey of big capital.

These insults (I am calling them what they are because they are certainly not criticisms) assume that Ramaphosa, or those who support him in the ANC and in society, have no mental faculties, no moral and ethical compass, to be who they are and to stand up for themselves. These insults assert that the man is an empty suit who has no ideas for himself, no theory to change his society, and crucially no history that grounds him to this land or its people.

Instead, we are told, Ramaphosa is controlled by the Oppenheimers, the Ruperts, the international banks, the billionaire Bill Gates and even imaginary forces from the dark web.

This is the thread peddled by Zuma and others who have sought to paint what he calls “the Ramaphosa ANC” as this unthinking animal that wants to hand South Africa to these fearsome capitalists. In true Zuma style, no evidence is ever presented.

Much of the criticism of Ramaphosa is because he has asserted his stance against corruption. The accusation that he is a lackey of white capital is an attempt to throw him off the goal of investigating, arresting, prosecuting, convicting, and jailing the corrupt.

It is worth noting that many of those accusing Ramaphosa of being a lackey of these billionaire interests are heavily implicated in corruption. So when the National Prosecuting Authority is strengthened, when Shamila Batohi or a similar person is brought in to clean up the institution, then these individuals’ corruption will be threatened or stopped.

What do these nefarious actors then do? They accuse those who enforce the law of being with or for white capitalists. This is not logical. When corruption happens it is the police station in Hammanskraal that does not get resources. Poor black people suffer. Crucially, it is the water treatment plant in Hammanskraal that does not get completed — and tens of black people die of cholera.

Much of the criticism of Ramaphosa is because he has asserted his stance against corruption. The accusation that he is a lackey of white capital is an attempt to throw him off the goal of investigating, arresting, prosecuting, convicting and jailing the corrupt. Criticism of his efforts — and insults of him — will not stop until these corrupt forces have got rid of him.

There is something even worse undergirding these dishonest Ramaphosa criticisms. It is the idea that black people — such as Ramaphosa — must all condone corruption and low standards to be acceptable. This is not just utter nonsense but displays a deep self-loathing on the part of those who make these accusations. It is disgusting to think that there are people who still see a black leader — and the 12-million national and regional votes he received — as being incapable of having his own views, thoughts and programmes.

It is telling that it is people like Zuma, who is friends with and is funded by a k-word-spewing racist such as Louis Liebenberg, who accuse Ramaphosa of being in the pay of whites. It is ironic that it is the likes of Zuma, whose evidence at the Zondo commission showed he would rush to take instructions from the Gupta family in Saxonwold, who accuse Ramaphosa of being controlled.

It is clear: they are pointing at Ramaphosa with their index finger, while pointing at themselves with three.