Listening to the silent majority

[13]

John Mavuso's mind, at 61 years of age, left me with the impression that here was a true South African patriot. I had already met him in 1988. His thinking was obviously directed towards seeking compromise and accomodation - exactly the same tactic followed by Chief Mangosothu Buthelezi. Mavuso is no easy walk-over for those who disagree with him, about policies to be followed, neither for blacks nor whites. I showed him Buthelezi's message. ‘First of all,’ he said, ‘in spite of having been asked politely to resign from the Inkatha Central Committee, I remain a member of that organisation. Chief Buthelezi is so sensitive of his personal position, that he apparently even fears anti-apartheid organisations overseas. At times he gives the impression that he will jump out of his own skin in order to run away from any possible criticism. He has made certain rash decisions in the past, because of his over-concern for overseas opposition. Chronic fear for possible reactions by his political

[p. 16]

opponents is one of Gatsha's most serious problems.’ I asked for an example. ‘For instance,’ said Mavuso, ‘he rushed the resignation of Thula Gibson, who had been his personal confidant for so long within KwaZulu. Gibson wanted to enter the liquor business. Therefore, Chief Buthelezi asked him to resign from the Central Committee of Inkatha. By that snap decision alone, he not only lost a valuable person within Inkatha, but he lost considerable influence in the Transvaal on the whole. Following this I was also asked to leave the Central Committee, and I ceased to be active for his movement in the Transvaal. Inkatha now has serious problems as a result of this identity crisis. Truly magnetic Inkatha leadership is lacking, also as a result of Gatsha's over-concern for possible embarrassment vis-à-vis foreign anti-apartheid groups.’

I asked Mavuso how blacks could ever build a firm political foundation to fulfil their dreams and aspirations as long as they continued to quarrel among themselves on the basis of petty, flimsy, irrational sensibilities. ‘I believe,’ he said, ‘that there is no possibility whatsoever of building solid black political machinery in this country, because black unity is a mere illusion, a pure fiction. To understand this, you have to take into consideration what has happened, for instance, to the African National Congress or the Pan African Congress. They have existed outside this country for many, many years and they never succeeded in finding common ground among themselves. Not even the distance from apartheid could help them agree among themselves. Black unity is a fallacy.’

But Mavuso struck a more optimistic note. ‘I think we have made tremendous progress in South Africa, and, in fact, the more moderate climate now developing abroad is a result of the constructive progress we have already made.^12. which does not yet mean that we have achieved the necessary black stability.’ He continued, ‘In the past, blacks had for instance no land tenure rights. Now, I can tell you as a TPA Executive, responsible for housing in the province of Transvaal, that as I talk to you just over 61 per cent of all dwellings in black urban areas are now privately-owned by blacks. This means that over the past three years, I have actively been presiding over a transformation of black society

12. This conversation was taped several weeks prior to John Mavuso playing a prominent role in the National Forum of Black Leaders discussing a future South Africa with the Government

[p. 17]

from a society of possessionless people to a society of home-owners. The spin-off from it is that we are moving towards increased stability, because people who are property owners are liable to become, also psychologically, responsible citizens. We feel that it is not correct to relate the calm atmosphere in the townships to the declaration of the state of emergency, because developments as I just described to you, have helped in particular to stabilize the situation. Owning one's own home positively affects mental attitudes.’

I referred to the many polls concluding that most blacks opposed sanctions. ‘That's what I have been saying during a 1988 trip to the United States and Europe, and at a big businessman's meeting in Zürich. To speak of sanctions is contrary to the aspirations of most black people. I was pleased to see the latest polls, because it confirmed once more what I have been saying overseas and to visitors to South Africa. Since the British have now presented these figures, they might at last be believed. I don't understand how activists like Desmond Tutu, Alan Boesak, Frank Chikane and Beyers Naudé think. The fact is, my day-to-day work brings me into constant contact with black people of all walks of life. The vibes I am picking up daily are that people want foremost security in jobs, housing, medical care and the like. Disinvestment definitely is contrary to these primary aspirations among blacks. So any one of us, going overseas in the so-called name of the black majority to advocate even more sanctions is not telling the truth. I, in any case, don't know where they find that majority. The people I live with in Soweto tell me quite a different story. And, now, the polls are confirming this point of view again.’

I referred to an editorial in Business Day saying, if Desmond Tutu were only in touch with reality, he could render a great service to South Africa by reversing his campaign.^13. ‘Tutu is not interested in benefiting South Africa,’ Mavuso told me. ‘He is doing it all for Tutu only. His foreign escapades have brought him a lot of money. That's why he continues with what he is doing.’

13. Business Day editorial, April 3, 1989