By Gillian Schutte
A meme declaring South Africa as the first African country to recolonise itself, circulated widely on social media this week. It was met with both laughter and grim acknowledgment. This dark humour reflects South Africans’ ability to find humour in adverse circumstances, especially those rooted in truth. Indeed, this meme resonates profoundly.
In July 2024, South Africa stands at a precarious crossroads, confronting a development that would have been unthinkable to the architects of its hard-won independence: recolonisation.
I speak of the formation of a Government of National Unity (GNU) which partners Ramaphosa’s African National Congress (ANC) with the Democratic Alliance (DA) and other neoliberal parties while sidelining progressive African parties such as Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK). This regressive step, promoted under the guise of economic stability and political reform, betrays utterly the principles that guided South Africa’s struggle against apartheid and colonial rule.
How did the unthinkable come to pass? Besides a citizenship that has been aggressively bamboozled by post 1994 liberal propaganda to vote against their own interests, what are the multiple forces and narratives that have facilitated this insidious turn? Was this a soft coup that took us all by surprise, though it has been long in the making. These are the questions that plague me as I bear witness, from the edge of my cognitive dissonance, the clock being turned back by a century. How on earth did decolonisation become recolonisation?
The Mirage of Decolonisation
Decolonisation theory emphasises the reclamation of autonomy, identity, and dignity by oppressed people’s in colonised nations. Ever since this call became part of the Fees Must Fall rhetoric, the backlash from liberal forces has been brutal. From liberal academics to liberal media the decolonisation project was up against an obdurate wall of market ideological pushback that starkly repudiated the ideals of decolonisation. Added to this resistance to progress, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) did little to push this discourse and universities did everything they could to muzzle and repress the decolonisation project.
In this light can we really claim to be astonished that South Africa has been handed back to the embrace of colonisation in 2024? Surely we can only feign surprise that the Ramaphosa administration made the decision to hand over power to foreign entities and global white monopoly capital by colluding with the DA instead of empowering its African citizens through an African-centric coalition? Many of us have long realised that the role of Ramaphosa, dating back to the 1970’s, has always been to finally open up a market arena that replicates the very dynamics of control and exploitation that decolonisation sought to dismantle.
To make matters worse this recolonisation is marketed as a pragmatic solution to the country’s socio-economic woes. Citizens are virtually hypnotised into obeisance by a neoliberal narrative that aggressively obscures the fact that inviting external powers to dictate domestic policies undermines their sovereignty and undoes any of the gains in economic and cultural agency that millions of South Africans fought and sacrificed for. It is a narrative pushed with such vigour that it has crept into the social discourse of all classes in this neo-colonial settler land – a master signifier that the spectre of colonialism will continue to haunt the nation, lurking in the guise of economic intervention and political stabilisation.
The Postcolonial Predicament
Postcolonial theory provides a lens to examine the enduring impact of colonial rule on former colonies. South Africa’s slide back into a state of aggressive recolonisation testifies to the failure of post-apartheid governance to fully extricate the country from the shackles of its colonial past. The perpetual inequalities, corruption, and social strife that plague the nation are cynically often created by and exploited by market-worshipping entities: the end game being to justify a return to colonial-style governance.
This regressive step of inviting the white-centric DA and other conservative parties into the GNU, as opposed to progressive African-centered parties, is not only a failure of domestic policy. It is also an inevitable consequence of the broader postcolonial condition. The global liberal order, with its neoliberal policies and economic prescriptions, has continually undermined the ability of postcolonial states to achieve genuine autonomy and development. Rather it has rendered the term “postcolonial” defunct. It can only be neocolonial.
In South Africa’s case, the recolonisation narrative is propelled by external pressures and internal failures, creating a toxic blend that threatens to erase decades of progress – albeit not enough progress by any yardstick. Still, turning back time to an era as painful as colonialism is the worst possible conclusion.
The Capitalist Exploitation
Marxist theory underscores how colonialism was driven by capitalist exploitation, with colonisers extracting resources and labour for their gain. South Africa’s recolonisation in 2024 continues this exploitative relationship. The nation’s resources, both human and natural, are again placed at the disposal of foreign interests, cloaked under the rhetoric of economic revitalisation and foreign investment.
It is a duplicitous move that deeply betrays the working class and marginalised communities in South Africa. Yet again, the hopes and aspirations of the majority to build an economy that belongs to them and serves their needs are dashed against the walls of their broken hearts as they witness another wave of recolonisation strip them of their agency.
It is a nightmare scenario that draws eerie parallels to the Netflix series Squid Games, where participants believe they have agency but are soon turned into disempowered spectators of their own collective demise, save for the individual winner. So too are South Africans turned into spectators of their own ruin – watching white colonists and their black lackeys re-establish a system where profits are siphoned off by foreign powers in a vampire economy that leaves them further disenfranchised and impoverished. This is the logic of capital, a predatory and insidious monster, selling the people hope even while it sucks the blood out of their existence.
The Socialist Betrayal
From the outset, the African National Congress promised a socialist revolution. This has been a failed project, though elements of social reform have made small changes the lives of many marginalised South Africans. These are manifest in meagre social grants that do not keep up-to-date with inflation and a litany of social reform promises that are never kept. From a truly socialist perspective, recolonisation is anathema to the principles of collective ownership, social justice, and equitable distribution of resources, including land redistribution. South Africa’s leadership, by capitulating to external pressures and abandoning the project of building a genuinely inclusive and egalitarian society, has betrayed these principles. Recolonisation is not a path to social justice but a surrender to the same forces of inequality and exploitation that have long plagued the nation. The new GNU, particularly the DA, looks set to rid the new administration of as many of the last of its progressive policies as it can.
PART TWO
The Role of Global Liberal Hegemony and Complicit Media
With its dominant ideological apparatus the global liberal order has significantly normalised and legitimised the recolonisation of South Africa. It is the foreign funded Media outlets like the Daily Maverick and News24 that have been most instrumental in this process. These platforms seek to portray themselves as progressive voices. Yet their mandate is to shift the narrative to portray neoliberalism/recolonisation as a necessary and even benevolent step.
Under the guise of balanced reporting, these media outlets have downplayed the sovereignty implications and highlighted the supposed benefits of foreign intervention. By framing the discourse in terms of economic pragmatism and political necessity, they have obscured the profound ethical and political compromises involved. This media complicity is an ideological betrayal that buttresses the global liberal hegemony that reinscribes severe inequality and exploitation.
In this way they have been instrumental in facilitating what I refer to as a soft coup or colour revolution in South Africa.
The Soft Coup: Media and Colour Revolutions
To expand on this idea the role of media in facilitating South Africa’s recolonisation process is glaringly evident when examining the funding affiliations of outlets like the Daily Maverick and amaBhungane, including media organisations such as Code for South Africa. These embedded platforms get ample resource support from organisations tied to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and it is these affiliations that cast doubt on their editorial independence. It is currently popular knowledge that the NED and affiliates are known to push an agenda aligned with global liberal interests.
One of the signifiers of this agenda is seen in obsessive reporting on perceived failures of black leadership that undermines local governance while subtly endorsing external intervention. This method is so obvious it can be described as banal and we all know that evil is found most often in the banal. Added to this is the dogged use of anti-Marxist rhetoric to create a narrative that demonises humanistic ideals for equality. It is this skewed focus that has ensured that the media is weaponised to become an intrinsic part of the soft coup that has unfolded. One can even pin point where this particular soft coup began – starting with the State Capture report and the subsequent Save South Africa (SOS) movement aimed at unseating former President Jacob Zuma.
The manner in which this played out reflects the undoing of many an African administration that looks away from the West to the more progressive BRICS. It is via the relentless highlighting of alleged corruption and inefficiencies within black-led administrations, that these media outlets work to erode public trust in local leadership, and thus pave the way for external forces to step in under the pretext of restoring order and stability. They wilfully use this strategic framing as a way to not only delegitimise the current leadership but also to justify and normalise the intervention of foreign powers and white oligarchs in South Africa’s political and economic spheres.
The consistent portrayal of Marxism and socialist policies as inherently flawed further aligns with the interests of global capital, creating a fertile ground for recolonisation disguised as economic reform. In essence, the liberal media has not merely reported on events but has actively shaped and facilitated the narrative that supports the recolonisation agenda, making it a crucial player in the soft coup we have just witnessed.
Similarities between Maidan and SOS
Both the Save South Africa (SOS) movement and the State Capture report have, in many ways, mirrored the characteristics of a colour revolution. “Colour Revolution” is a term used to describe movements that seem legitimate and possibly progressive, calling for democratic change against supposedly despotic governments. What they are instead, are guises utilised by Western hegemonic forces transmogrifying what could sometimes be legitimate concerns into movements that are aimed at overthrowing governments through non-violent protests and strategic use of media. Similar to the Maidan uprising in Ukraine, these movements are funded and supported by foreign interests which are heavily influenced by Western funding and strategic narratives. Far from being rights based, these colour revolutions are there to pave the way for the drive for global dominance of the US and its NATO Allies.
The 2016 release of the State Capture report detailed extensive corruption within the Zuma administration, particularly focusing on the influence of the Gupta family. While the report highlighted genuine issues, the intense media coverage and the subsequent mobilisation of civil society groups like SOS have the stamp of externally influenced political engineering. This movement gained significant traction in advocating for President Zuma’s removal, an easy enough strategy since media had paved the way with its ongoing propaganda and demonisation of Zuma. In this way it was not merely a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment but was supported by Human Rights, Chapter 9’s and a mushrooming of organisations with mercenary ties to Western liberal interests, notably those funded by entities like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
The parallels with Ukraine’s Maidan uprising are striking. In both cases, there was a pronounced focus on exposing corruption and promoting democracy, with significant backing from Western NGOs and media. The coordinated efforts of media, civil society, internal capital and foreign funding sources in South Africa reflect a broader strategy seen in other colour revolutions. By systematically undermining the credibility of local leadership and amplifying calls for reform, these movements facilitate a form of soft coup. The ultimate goal is to establish a government that aligns with liberal democratic ideals and neoliberal economic policies, often at the expense of true national sovereignty and self-determination.
This strategy of externally influenced regime change poses significant challenges to the autonomy and stability of nations like South Africa, where the veneer of democratic reform masks a deeper agenda of recolonisation and control.
A Call to Resist
South Africa’s recolonisation in 2024 is a severe indictment of both the nation’s political leadership and the broader global order. The only choice now is for the collective to unite and resist recolonisation. This resistance must be waged with the same fervour and determination that characterised the struggle against apartheid and colonial rule. South Africa’s future depends on its ability to defy these regressive forces and to forge a path that truly reflects the aspirations and dignity of its people.
This article was first published in two parts -The Mercury 16-17 July 2024.