Poet Khalil Gibran writes: “Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, and though they belong with you, they belong not to you.”
This encapsulates the conundrum of being an influential, primarily political, asset of society and a parent to your children.
If you are a politician, particularly ablack South African, what may seem like the pinnacle of your career could turn into a burden for your children. The idea that human career advancement relies on connections, including those with parents, does not necessarily apply to the children of political leaders and figures.
While most parents' children must cultivate relationships to build their social capital, this can become a double-edged sword for the children of politicians.
What worsens this disregard of the implications for the politician as a parent and the children who came through the politicians, not by choice, is the ruthlessness of succession battles in political parties.
Every business school and business literature emphasises leveraging visible or invisible networks. Success, especially in business and arguably in many other fields, is closely tied to having solid and expansive relationships. Some individuals are born into these connections, while others must work diligently to create them. Regardless, the more connected a person is, the greater their business advantage.
Most mentorship programmes include a crucial point: being qualified and skilled at your job is just the starting point. The real differentiators are the risks you take and the people you know. A relationship portfolio serves as social capital, providing an edge over those lacking such connections.
Being born into certain families equates to social capital. It positions individuals as nodes or pivots that others would forever seek to work with or around. The ethical and lawful use of such capital distinguishes those born with a “silver spoon” from those who must strive to find their way. The arc of ethicality with social capital has historically bent towards those who seek to have it instead of those born into it.
The boundaries of political integrity are often blurred in a country like South Africa, where mere allegations of corruption against political leaders can be weaponised to undermine rivals. The breadth of disrepute as a concept to attach to malfeasance and corruption has made this terrain of politicking the murkiest. Many capable individuals, whom the nation would have preferred to see in leadership positions, select to lead private lives instead, fearing the repercussions a political career may have on their families.
Consider the bright young individuals who have used their parents' social capital to achieve success. Their merit-based accomplishments are frequently overshadowed by perceptions of who their parents are. This context also affects individuals for whom what they considered normal before may suddenly be an integrity burden.
The jury was still out on whether keeping money in foreign currency in your house when you are a high-end game auctioneer was normal until the Phala Phala saga foregrounded the possibility of illegality. Equally, it may be questionable what is wrong for a politician to live in an expensive mansion owned by his sons or daughters.
Moreover, South Africa has not evolved into a society where politics is considered a legitimate career path for making a living. Due to historical context, many African cultures expect politics to be a calling rather than a profession, discouraging the notion of wealth accumulation from political involvement. While it is acceptable for other occupations to engage in transactions and earn brokerage fees, political connections exist outside this profitable framework.
Without any briefing for Paul Mashatile, who this commentary argues does not have the profile of a communications powerhouse, it is evident that the attack on his character is part of a co-ordinated campaign. His family’s wealth, potentially amassed through means similar to those of many others who facilitate transactions for a fee, is persistently framed in a context that implies corruption from the outset.
It appears there is a deliberate agenda to select one or two well-positioned individuals to assume leadership of political parties, subjecting them to public character scrutiny. Some media outlets have taken on the role of modern-day executioners in the civic sphere, inflicting severe damage that even their children become collateral in this battle, posing risks of intergenerational and class-reversal implications. If this is not a form of public lynching, its fairness is yet to be judged, given the selective nature of who falls victim.
What worsens this disregard of the implications for the politician as a parent and the children who came through the politicians, not by choice, is the ruthlessness of succession battles in political parties. They forget that chaos, calamity and scorched-earth political contestations are not inevitable because their parties might be in irreversible decline. How they manage the deterioration or the insatiable appetite to ‘phata’ at all costs might become a permanent catastrophe for generations.
• Dr FM Lucky Mathebula is the head of faculty, People Management, and founder of The Thinc Foundation, a think-tank based at the Da Vinci Institute
For opinion and analysis consideration, email opinions@timeslive.co.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.