By Gillian Schutte
In 2024, South Africa’s fragile political landscape unravelled under the weight of the Government of National Unity (GNU). Far from the stabilising force it was claimed to be, the GNU has exposed the depths of neoliberal encroachment on the country’s sovereignty. With the Democratic Alliance (DA) holding significant influence and neoliberal policies shaping its direction, the GNU has become a symbol of recolonisation, undermining the very ideals that once inspired South Africa’s liberation movements. For the African National Congress (ANC), it is a complete capitulation to global capital’s demands.
Touted as a rainbow coalition, the GNU consolidates power for neoliberal interests under the pretence of inclusivity and governance. The privatisation of Eskom epitomises this betrayal, placing the nation’s critical infrastructure in private hands while deepening inequality. This move, framed as a pragmatic solution to South Africa’s energy crisis, is a clear indication of how the GNU serves foreign interests. Western financial institutions and US-aligned development agencies have embedded their agendas into the country’s economic policies, reframing domination as stability.
The ANC’s role in enabling this is undeniable. It has long since traded its revolutionary aspirations for the management of neoliberal governance. For some, this outcome is not surprising; the ANC’s history of compromise, from its negotiations during the transition to democracy, has always suggested a party more comfortable with moderating than dismantling existing power structures. The GNU simply formalises the ANC’s transformation into a custodian of global capital, a party now indistinguishable from the forces it once sought to overthrow.
The fractured state of South Africa’s left, which should be at the forefront of resisting the GNU, compounds this crisis. Instead of uniting against the neoliberal recolonisation of the country, the left remains deeply divided. The Economic Freedom Fighters’ (EFF) decision to attack Jacob Zuma’s uMkhonto we Sizwe Party (MKP) is a tragic reminder of the factionalism that undermines any collective resistance. At a time when the left should be advancing a unified alternative, internal conflicts dominate the political space.
The MKP, established in 2023, is an attempt to reclaim the revolutionary principles that the ANC has long abandoned. Rooted in the legacy of the original uMkhonto we Sizwe, the MKP advocates for radical land reform, collective ownership, and a realignment with BRICS to challenge Western dominance. Its unapologetically Africanist agenda has made it a target—not just of neoliberal forces but also of the EFF, which has inexplicably chosen to alienate rather than ally with the MKP.
Julius Malema's media attacks on the MKP reflect a disturbing pivot for the EFF. Once a party at the forefront of radical transformation, the EFF has shifted toward populist pragmatism, prioritising incremental gains over systemic change. This drift has alienated sections of its base that saw it as the vanguard of African nationalism. Many EFF heavyweights have joined MKP as a result of this shift. Malema’s woundedness has culminated in his public campaign against the MKP. More than a political misstep; it reveals the extent to which personal ambitions and factional rivalries have taken precedence over shared ideological goals. This is a failure that has weakened the broader left at a time when it cannot afford such fractures.
BRICS offers a potential, albeit complex, avenue for cohesion within the African nationalist left. As an alliance that challenges the dominance of US-led global capitalism, BRICS could serve as a counterweight to the neoliberal order. For the MKP, alignment with BRICS represents a rejection of Western interference and a commitment to building a multipolar world. Through partnerships with countries like China, Russia, and Brazil, BRICS provides a platform for reimagining economic sovereignty and development outside the constraints of Western financial institutions.
The ANC’s engagement with BRICS, however, is riddled with contradictions. While it publicly aligns with BRICS’s multipolar ambitions, its policies remain closely tied to Western capital. This duality undermines the potential of BRICS to function as a transformative force in South Africa’s political economy. By remaining entangled with Western financial systems, the ANC dilutes the power of BRICS as an alternative framework for sovereignty and development. The MKP, in contrast, has embraced BRICS as central to its vision of breaking free from the neoliberal constraints imposed by the West.
The potential for BRICS to unify the African nationalist left lies in its ability to provide a shared economic and political strategy that transcends regional and ideological divisions. Through BRICS, African nations could collaborate on projects that centre land reform, infrastructure development, and resource nationalisation—all core tenets of the MKP’s platform. Yet, for BRICS to be more than an abstract hope, its members must commit to realising its multipolar vision. South Africa’s current leadership, locked in the neoliberal constraints of the GNU, lacks the ideological clarity to fully leverage the potential of BRICS.
The influence of South Africa's Western-serving 'left' further complicates these dynamics. Through its dominance of NGOs, think tanks, and faux progressive media platforms, the Western 'left' has positioned itself as a gatekeeper in African politics. It strategically marginalises radical movements like the MKP, portraying them as impractical or extremist while prioritising reformist poverty alleviation projects that perpetuate dependency on Western aid. The MKP’s alignment with BRICS challenges the intellectual and financial dominance of the Western 'left', making it a target for delegitimisation within global 'progressive' narratives.
The GNU has entrenched these fractures within the African left, leaving unity as a distant goal. While grassroots mobilisation offers some hope, the path to cohesion remains fraught. Movements rooted in ubuntu and collective action must reclaim the Africanist ideals sidelined by neoliberalism. The MKP’s commitment to radical transformation could serve as a rallying point, but this would require the EFF and ANC to engage in meaningful dialogue. For the EFF, this means abandoning factionalism and recommitting to African nationalism. For the ANC, it requires confronting its entanglements with Western financial systems and rediscovering whatever revolutionary spirit it might still possess.
As 2025 begins, South Africa stands at a critical crossroads. The GNU has entrenched neoliberal policies, deepened inequality, and eroded sovereignty. Without a cohesive left, the DA’s dominance will continue unchecked, and the ANC will remain complicit in the country’s recolonisation. The EFF’s attacks on the MKP have weakened the left’s prospects for unity but also highlight the urgency of overcoming these divisions. BRICS, despite its complexities, could offer a framework for solidarity within the African nationalist left, but only if its potential is embraced with conviction.
The future of South Africa depends on the left’s ability to reject Western dominance, rebuild solidarity, and reclaim its revolutionary purpose. If these opportunities are not seized, recolonisation will no longer be an abstract threat but a lived reality. BRICS could provide the cohesion necessary to counter the neoliberal order, but it remains to be seen whether South Africa’s fractured left can rise to the challenge.
* Gillian Schutte is a film-maker, and a well-known social justice and race-justice activist and public intellectual.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.