By: Takudzwa Makoni



The single most important concept in the history of social dynamics is the idea of democracy.
This belief that a person- a people- can choose their own fate has led to wars and to genocide, to the rise and fall of empires.

The democracy theory has succeeded over the “to each according to his needs” social system espoused by Marx and his ilk, and the nationalistic “kampfs” totalitarian regimes have tried to impose on the world. As we accelerate towards the next phase of our social evolution, the democracy theory plays a major role in defining our moral compasses true north.

Democracy is without doubt the most marketable concept in group organisational theoretics. When an idea can be packaged with evocative words such as ‘hope’ and ‘freedom’, a hard sell is unnecessary. Indeed, we are conditioned to believe in our inalienable right to self-actualisation, and choosing our government plays a key role in our super-egocentric idea of what we are entitled to, and who we are.

Theorists such as Abraham Maslow and his ubiquitous Hierarchy of Needs would agree that the idea of being a participant in selecting those that will lead us fulfils fundamental needs in our ‘self’ and in our perceptions of ourselves.

As the ‘last man standing,’ {more or less}, the democracy system in theory represents the height of socio-cultural evolution, i.e. the process, according to Herbert Spencer’s 1857 tome Social Darwinism, by which structural reorganisation is, “affected through time, eventually producing a form or structure which is qualitatively different from the ancestral form.”

Evolution though, by definition, brings about not just change, but positive change that is “qualitatively different”. This then, is the test that South Africa must hold itself to- has this democratic dispensation proved ‘evolutionary’ in nature? Indeed, has the great rainbow nation experiment produced a functioning democracy?

Democracy by definition is a social contract. An elected body is vested with authority, and in return is expected to create, according to The Democracy Institute, a “formal equality of rights and privileges.”
In 1994, a brand new nation was born. Peoples that had suffered almost 400 years of institutionalised discrimination were presented with something that they had never had before- choice.
“ I still remember waking up hours before morning on voting day because the excitement would not let us sleep,” reminisces Nomfundo Mahtlatini. 
“It was like we were finally waking up from a bad dream.”

To paraphrase Dr. King, individuals would from then on be judged according to the content of their character, and not by how kinky their hair was. This ‘new beginning’ was to usher in the era of ‘Freedom.’ 
The belief was that the mark one made on one’s ballot would automatically lead to emancipation not just politically, but socio-economically as well. For most South Africans, their ballot was a “choosing” in the most real possible sense of the word.

Like hitting the reset button, this ‘democracy’ was billed as giving the previously disadvantaged a new lease on fate. 
Fast forward twenty years, and the promised “freedoms” have not quite materialised for the majority of South Africans.

Former President Nelson Mandela said, after casting his vote in South Africa’s first democratic elections: “Our message is that the basic needs of the masses of the people must be addressed- the creation of jobs, of houses…providing free, compulsory quality education, running water, paved roads.”
The acknowledgement that socio-economics would define the success or failure of this democratic dispensation was part and parcel of this ‘new deal’- the equitable redistribution not necessarily of wealth, but of opportunity.

An examination of all available statistics shows that this democracy ideal has not delivered on its inherent obligation.

According to the World Economic Forum {WEF} Global Risk 2014 report, South Africa has one of the highest unemployment rates in the world for people between the ages of 15-24. The report, which estimates that more than 50 percent of young South Africans aged 15-24 are unemployed, found that only Greece and Spain have higher unemployment in this age range.

According to Statistics SA, unemployment in South Africa rose to 25.2% in the first quarter of 2013. Advocacy-Aid estimates that 26.3% of the population live below the food poverty line. To add insult to an already festering injury, the South African education system ranks 140th out of the 144 ranked countries by the World Economic Forum.

These numbers are exceedingly difficult to wrap one’s head around. Lost in the maelstrom of  statistics and economic indicators, is the story of a lost generation- the generation that democracy failed.
“Tunzi” Khumalo was 5 years old in 1994.

“I remember that everyone was excited because at last we didn’t have to be poor. We could get educated and build a better life for our families. Or so we thought. Today I am living in the same township we all did before democracy. We are still poor. My father died long ago, but I can honestly say that my life is not much better than his was.”

When half a countries’ youth are unemployed and/or uneducated, there is no arguing the fact that the democratic process has reneged on the social contract. Straw polls of Durban University of Technology students revealed that today, many are disillusioned with the concept of democracy.

“I don’t know if I would vote,” says Gift Nyamapfene, a third year student. “
“It seems like we as the youth cannot rely on anyone but ourselves to better our situations. I’m one of the lucky few with an education and prospects. I sometimes wonder how others my age maintain hope. It can become a very dangerous situation.”

Bryan Caplan’s 2007 The Myth of The Rational Voter, contended that voters are irrational in the political sphere and have “systematically biased ideas concerning economics.” 
If one holds this line of reasoning to be true, then one could contend that democracy, especially in the South African context, is akin to giving the asylum keys to the inmates. Of course this is hyperbole.

The point though, is that if a people, more specifically a people’s youth, are excluded from the benefits assumed to be inherent within a democratic dispensation, then they will lose faith and eventually replace the seemingly ineffective administration with one that purports to wrong these rights, and not necessarily with a government capable or willing to make the responsible choices.

The ‘democracy’ social construct exists only as long as it is serving the needs of the people. As elections approach, the expected clarion call for the youth to vote misses the bigger question- has this system really made a “better life for all”? 
Perhaps the time has come to re-examine what we expect from this system, and if democracy as practised here, is sustainable, or even practicable in the South African context.