Of Gramsci, Astrologers and Bikinis (Part 3 of 3)

 By: Siyanda Pali

Economist and Business Professor Aaron Levenstein once stated that," Statistics are like bikinis, what they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." Such is the affinity for data and statistics. This is the case due to an innate desire to measure, to quantify that which is being observed or examined. However, in the pursuit to gauge Africa's progress, it is important not to lose focus of all the parts which comprise of the big picture.

FW De Klerk, Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki

One of the most popular measures for growth and development used as an Economic indicator of societies is Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The concept of GDP was invented by American Economist Simon Kuznets in 1934, and as a measure, is used to quantify the overall production which has taken place within the borders of a country over a year. It highlights the monetary value of all final goods and services produced over the latter mentioned period. There is also a variation of this metric, Gross National Product, which measures all economic activity or the production of all goods and services of a country, irrespective of location, as long as a certain nationality is being observed eg a South African factory in South Africa would constitute part of South Africa's GDP, but would not do so in Mali. Conversely, a South African factory in Mali would also be included in South Africa's GNP, but would not form part of South Africa's GDP. 

This measure (GDP) has become popular for numerous reasons eg it produces an overall picture of the state of an economy. However, it has its shortcomings. Firstly,  the inherent constraint of focusing on the total production of goods and services within the borders of a country is somewhat myopic in an open economy, with GNP being favoured as a better measure by others. Secondly, and perhaps more significantly, is the fact that it disproportionately favours economic output over well-being. eg a preoccupation with increased economic growth does not adequately take other factors such as environmental factors as metrics of development and well-being in a society. 

The latter adds impetus to the notion that there needs to be a shift to measuring or paying attention to metrics which have greater significance in a society. Per capita income is particularly useful because it quantifies the average income of each individual citizen of a country, given total GDP. It is an extremely useful measure, because it provides a sense of how inclusive growth within a society is. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is another measure which indicates whether or not incomes of individuals are losing purchasing power at unreasonable or abnormally high rates. 

The traditional measures from a Developmental Economics, Microeconomics and Macroeconomics perspective are well-known. However, this does not mean that we ought to remain exclusively fixated or bound by them. In contrast, it is plausible to explore other metrics which also provide more valuable insights, and will be more fruitful in analysing progress in a developmental state.  Another development measure which can or ought to be particularly useful in a developmental state is the rate of land reform which has taken place per annum or in total, which I refer to as the Land Reform Quotient (LRQ), ranging from 0 to 1, with 0 indicating no land reform post independence to 1 indicating perfect land reform or redistribution post independence . In the case of South Africa, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform indicated in a 2017 report that Whites owned 72% of farm and agricultural land, Coloureds owned 15%, Indians owned 5% and Africans, which constitute more than 80% of the population, owned only 4%. This is a critical, but disturbing metric to note, given that South Africa has had a democratic government for more than 28 years. Related to land ownership, is the Gini coefficient, which measures the wealth inequality in a nation. According to a World Bank report in March 2022, South Africa is the world's most unequal society, with 10% of the population owning more than 80% of the wealth. It is not astonishing to note that one of the reasons stated for such large disparities in wealth ownership, is landlessness among the general population. It goes without saying that more than a century of legislated dispossession, with the 1913 Natives Land Act of particular significance, will not automatically be addressed by a neoliberal inclination.  

Contrary to popular belief, the African continent is wealthy beyond compare. The United Nations states that the continent boasts about a third of the world's mineral reserves, 12% of the world's oil reserves, and 8% of the world's natural gas. It is also endowed with 40% of the world's Gold, and up to 90% of the world Chromium and Platinum. Furthermore, the world's greatest quantity of reserves of Diamonds, Uranium and Cobalt, are in Africa. The latter, mostly situated in the Democratic Republic of Congo, will be crucial for the electric vehicle market in the long-run. In addition, Africa possesses almost two-thirds of the world's arable land, as well as approximately 10% of the world's renewable fresh water reserves. These and more, comprise of Africa's riches. 

With 30% to 50% of wealth in Africa's countries consisting of natural capital, it is important to ask: what returns or benefits, if any, do citizens or the general population reap from this wealth? What sovereign wealth funds have been created for the benefit of societies? What are the infant mortality rates within a nation? How robust is the healthcare system? Does the population have access to quality infrastructure and transportation? Does the general populace have access to affordable energy, decent housing and services? At a broader level, does the structure or architecture of a society promote upward mobility for the general population, or is this the case for only an elite few?  

One of the challenges on the continent, other than illicit financial flows, which are estimated at $195 billion US per annum, are leaders who come to power, and eventually use their power for the purposes of self-aggrandisement. The leaders and their families become fabulously wealthy almost overnight, while the vast majority of the population remain stagnant in terms of welfare and material terms. This is a phenomenon which is common globally, with political capital and mileage in a society being translated into financial capital for an elite few.

There are numerous examples either by unlawful means or through policy instruments, in which the latter is realised. In Nigeria, former President Sani Abacha amassed an estimated fortune of $ 5 billion US at the time of his death in 1998. The per capita income in Nigeria at the time was a mere $2090 US. In South Africa, the likes of Tokyo Sexwale (estimated net worth $ 200 million US), Saki Macozoma (R 565 million or $38.8 million US) , Patrice Motsepe (R44.23 billion or $3.1 billion US) as well as the current President, Cyril Ramaphosa (R10 billion or $ 700 million US) became wealthy  almost overnight, initially thanks to a policy called Black Economic Empowerment (BEE). It is or was certainly their right to enter the business arena. However, one must question whether this policy has made a tectonic shift in the lives of the majority native population in South Africa, whether or not it does indeed alter the structural foundations which perpetuated centuries of dispossession and alienation of South Africa's workers.

How, you may ask, does the hegemon maintain its power? This, according to Gramsci, is achieved by taking control of the intellectuals in a society, the education, and the philosophy which drives people to political action. The earliest Marxists were so focused on a war of maneuver, in anticipation of the proletariat revolution which Marx had predicted. As such, they were completely unaware that a population could be so disjointed that a proletariat revolution might never take place because the hegemon had prevailed in the war of position. Addressing this aspect, noted Gramsci, is the key to advancing any significant social change in a society.

The precursor for why a hegemon maintains its power is because of a strong motivator which drives the behaviour of the population: self-interest. This is partly the reason why Apartheid in South Africa continued for as long as it did. It is the reason why people in political parties, companies, institutions, governments etc, turn a blind eye to gross injustices and atrocities. They behave in such a manner either out of naivety or apathy because the current system appears to work in their favour or due to the desire to appeal to a certain power structure, with the hope that their loyalty to the hegemon will be rewarded. This mindset of an indifference to injustice is one of the greatest challenges a movement seeking a bona fide social change needs to overcome in the minds of the population. 

Not only are the disparities in wealth inequality in South Africa disturbing, the trend from an income inequality perspective is equally gloomy, often exacerbated along racial lines. In an Oxfam SA report relating to the pay gap between top executives and ordinary workers, it was discovered that the gap between CEOs and ordinary workers in Spain was 172:1. In the USA, it was 300:1. In India, it was 483:1. Alas, in South Africa, the gap was a staggering 541:1. What stage of Capitalism is South Africa in for it to be normal for a CEO to earn an income 541 times that of a normal employee? 

If we are to ever realise a true and genuine freedom in South Africa and Africa, White supremacy, among other things, ought to be dismantled at a material, cultural and epistemic level. Gramsci correctly implores us to keep a healthy and general skepticism about the status quo. If not, there is a high probability that despite having political power in the form of democratically elected governments after centuries of colonial and Apartheid rule, the hegemon remains in power, and at a material, cultural and epistemic level, things remain the same.

We ought to remain circumspect about the fact that the goal of the hegemon is to remain in power. Furthermore, it is to do so with the consent of the population. Given the above, it is vital for us at a national and continental level to heed the words of Dr Martin Luther King Jr in a 1966 speech, in which he implored his audience to be maladjusted to injustice. 

On a sobering note, the former-mentioned Oxfam report states that "It takes 4.58 days for the best-paid executive in Shoprite to earn what a temporary worker at vineyards in South Africa will earn in their lifetime." Africa is a wealthy continent in which the general populace seldom enjoy the wealth of their land, and in some instances, their labour, a source of incredible cognitive dissonance, unless drastic steps are taken to reverse the tide. 

To quote former Uruguayan President Jose Mujica, "Governments cannot create magic, but they can redistribute the wealth." We ought not to fear to reimagine a different country and continent, for the national democratic revolution ought to find expression by creating opportunity and value for all members of society. 

Africa Month: Of Gramsci, Astrologers and Bikinis (Part 1 of 3)

By: Siyanda Pali

In approximately 1 year from now, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) will commemorate  60 years since its inception on 25 May 1963. Egypt will celebrate 69 years since its Revolution Day or National Day on 18 June of 1953. The Federal Republic of Nigeria will celebrate its 62nd year of independence in October of this year, as will the Federal Republic of Somalia on 1 July 2022. The Republic of South Africa marked 28 years of independence on 27 April of this year. These are all significant periods of time. With the hopes and dreams of 1.39 billion people in the balance, this is a befitting time as any to take stock. 

AU headquarters (africa.com)

On the eve of the 20th century, the last decade in particular, the Italian Marxist scholar, philosopher, theorist, thinker and writer Antonio Gramsci was born in Sardinha, Italy. The fourth of 7 sons to Francesco and Guiseppina Gramsci, he entered the world on 22 January 1891. As fate would have it, he was a man who would fight against the odds his entire life.

 At birth, and during the formative years of his life, he battled a disorder, Pott's disease, which caused a lump on his chest and his back. At the time, doctors were convinced this would be the end of him. Remedial measures for this included a harness with straps which girded his deformed frame from the armpit area, among others, from which he was hung from the ceiling as therapy. In the likely event of his demise, a coffin in which he was to be buried was stored by his parents in their house. This was the start of Gramci's life.  

In addition to his personal struggles, mostly related to his health, he also endured a period of family turmoil. His father was unceremoniously arrested for alleged embezzlement in 1898, which forced the young Gramsci to abort his plans to continue his education, finding work as a casual labourer in numerous jobs. He eventually completed his high school education in Cagliari, where he resided with his elder brother Genaro, then a staunch socialist with a military background. However, despite the obvious influence of his brother, the young Gramsci's intellectual posture was not that of a socialist, but rather that of Sardinian nationalism, borne of the discontent of the Sardinian peasantry such as miners by their rapidly developing northern neighbours, which was invariably repressed by the Italian mainland. 

It was in 1911 that Antonio Gramsci won a scholarship to study at the University of Turin. Aged 20, his stance shifted from that of Sardinian nationalism to that of a society divided along class lines: bosses and workers. Despite possessing academic and intellectual chutzpah, Gramsci discontinued his studies at the University of Turin in 1915 at the age of 25 due to mostly the blight of ill-health, financial difficulties as well as increasing political engagements, leaving the university having acquired a vast knowledge of philosophy and history. 

Gramsci later fell foul of Mousoulini's fascist regime, which led to his arrest in 1926, despite his parliamentary immunity, amid an imposition of emergency laws predicated by an alleged assassination attempt on Mussolini's life. The words uttered by the then prosecutor at the trial are perhaps the most famous words uttered at that time. They continue to capture the imagination of thinkers, readers, writers and scholars alike. "For twenty years, we must stop this brain from functioning", were the ironic utterances of the prosecutor. Little did they know that Gramsci's imprisonment would have the complete opposite effect on his intellectual prowess and productivity. He ended up writing more than 3000 pages of history and analysis, as well as more than 30 notebooks.

In the Communist Manifesto, Marx predicts that at some point, the proletariat would overthrow the bourgeoisie. All they had to lose were their chains. He foresaw that they would then implement a new system of economic stratification. There's no doubt that some were hoping that this would be Communism. Perhaps others were hoping for Socialism. The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848. To the surprise of some Neo-marxist scholars, this did not take place in the west during the 19th century, neither did it occur in the 20th century. Why was it that people who were working in intolerable conditions, which may have very well inspired the Communist Manifesto in the first place, remain in such conditions? 

Friederich Engels made a scathing critique of Capitalism in his 1845 book "The Conditions of the Working Class in England". To his credit, it was based upon facts and evidence, which he dutifully gathered from parliamentary reports, chamber of commerce dispatches etc. His goal was to engage in his critique based upon an objective data framework. Engels noted, among other things, that, "They are given damp tenements, basement hovels or attic rooms that are neither water-proof from above or below. Their houses are built in a way that the moist air has no outlet..women made incapable of giving birth, children crippled, men weakened, limbs crushed, entire generations blighted, infected with emaciation and infirmity, merely to fill the purses of the bourgeoisie".  At a broader level, it raised questions about what happens in a society when the full might of the negative externalities of rampant industrialisation in the form of capitalism is at its zenith? It raised questions about basic labour rights in societies.

In spite of the above conditions of despair, Marx's prediction did not come to pass. It became clear among some thinkers and scholars that control over a population extended far beyond the hallowed halls of parliament. It became evident that political control is almost always predicated by cultural control. Gramsci also examines the concept of political control, exploring the question that when there is a dominant class or social group in a society, how does such a class or group rise to power? Why would the proletariat acquiesce to participating in a system which contributes to their repression or oppression? 

The answer to why the latter was true, according to Gramsci, was due to a concept which he referred to as Cultural Hegemony. Gramsci the thinker is probably most well-known for his work on Cultural Hegemony, which was an expansion of 'hegemony' as propounded by Russian Marxist Vladimir Lenin, which described the political leadership of the working class in a democratic revolution. The root of the word 'hegemony' has it's origins from the Greek, which means, "to lead" or "to rule over" according to some translators. In ancient Greece, a hegemon then, was a state with an extraordinary military advantage over another state. It denoted the threat or possibility of physical dominance of one state by another. As such, if the weaker or relatively weaker state did not comply with the demands of the hegemon, they faced the probability of a certain unpleasant future event such as annexation, invasion, being burnt to ashes etc. 

The term 'hegemony' referred to the danger or possibility of physical dominance over a population.  As highlighted by Stephen West, in the modern era in which we live, the definition of hegemony needs to evolve to capture the reality of the status quo. Those who exercise power have come to know that military dominance is but one method of exercising control over a population, and that a far more effective means to do so, is by manipulating the cultural parameters which people have to circumnavigate. To be a human being, among other things, is to live within a certain culture. This then begs the question:  What is a culture? It is a set of norms, structures, ordinances, taboos, values. To paraphrase Stephen West, "it is the sum-total of all the rituals we engage with on a daily basis which all come together to create a cohesive society." To what degree, according to Gramsci, do the current norms and rules exist to reinforce themselves? To what degree do the current rules and norms exist in the minds of the population as nature in the world? To what extent is the reality of the world we live in attributable to nature, and how much of it is attributable to culture?  

The latter are incredibly pertinent questions because according to Gramsci, if a group or class can control the narrative, and convince the layman that the current set of cultural norms is a static, natural way in which the world is or works, there is little chance of protest, seeking justice or change. 

To explain nature, Jim Collins provides useful input in his book, "Good to Great: Why some companies make the leap, and others do not". He states," To use an analogy, the "Leadership is the answer to everything" perspective is the modern equivalent of the "God is the answer to everything" perspective that held back our scientific understanding of the physical world in the Dark Ages. In the 1500's, people ascribed all events they didn't understand to God. Why did the crops fail? God did it. Why did we have an earthquake? God did it. What holds the planets in place? God. But with the Enlightenment, we began the search for a more scientific understanding -physics, chemistry, biology and so forth. Not that we became atheists, but we gained deeper understanding of how the universe ticks. Similarly, every time we attribute everything to "Leadership," we're no different to people from the 1500s. We're simply admitting our ignorance. Not that we should become leadership atheists (leadership does matter)".

According to Gramsci, dominant social classes have the ability to dictate cultural norms. As such, those born in such societies tend to associate these cultural norms as nature. They often see things as 'the way the world is', something one ought to learn to accept. 

The latter, as per Gramsci, is the reason why Marx's prediction did not come true. It is why the proletariat never broke free from the chains which oppressed or suppressed them. They had accepted them as the "natural state of the world they lived in." 

According to Gramsci, cultural norms become the 'common sense' which the proletariat use to rationalise their position in the world. When the 'common sense' of one's world serves to justify the dominance of one class by another, with any reasonable critique made of the status quo met with the unsatisfactory response "that's how the world is" or "that's how the world works", ones very being becomes a pillar upholding cultural hegemony. Gramsci does not necessarily purport that life should be one without any exertion, challenge or difficulty. However, the more plausible question would be: how challenging, strenuous or difficult does life have to be? What aspects of one's life, accepted as culture, does one accept in their life, and as a result, only benefits in a highly skewed manner, the interests of a dominant group in a society? 

One of the best examples of this is the prevalence of overt and subliminal racism in a society. It permeates every aspect of everyday life, and navigating this is no small feat in South Africa, Africa or anywhere else in the world for that matter. 

In 1992, Nelson Mandela, Tito Mboweni and Saki Macozoma were part of a delegation which represented South Africa at the World Economic Forum in Davos. Mr Mandela was to appear with a panel of other speakers such as FW De Klerk and Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi. The then future Minister of Labour, Tito Mboweni and Saki Macozoma pursuaded Nelson Mandela to tone down his rhetoric on nationalisation. While at Davos, having caught wind of the ANC's economic plans, Li Peng, China's Premier at the time, requested the chairperson of the WEF to arrange a meeting with Nelson Mandela, during which he shared that from China's own experience, perhaps nationalisation was not the best route to take. This sentiment was echoed by the Vietnamese Prime Minister. After these discussions, Mandela beckoned to the ANC delegation that they ought to "forget this nationalisation thing, [and] focus on the basic needs of our people". Shortly afterwards, the team was off to South Africa, and following some deliberations and the Nasrec Conference, a policy document, 'Ready to Govern' was born.

What an awesome responsibility was placed squarely upon the shoulders of South Africa's first democratically elected government. In essence, they had to conceptualise a new country, after centuries of colonial and apartheid rule. Some aspects were handled masterfully, while others can and should be improved. 

The importance of Gramsci's work as a scholar is perhaps useful for not only South Africa, after 28 years of democratic rule, but also for the African continent, with the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) formed in 1963, and its successor, the African Union, formed in 2002 in Durban, South Africa. By pausing to consider what aspects of our lives in actual fact constitute nature and what aspects constitute culture, and deeply interrogate Gramsci's theory of Cultural Hegemony, perhaps we can make strides towards crystalising what our values are, ensuring that the national democratic revolution can find expression in South Africa, and across Africa.