Does party ideology matter? Voter implications in South Africa
Are people conservative or liberal because of the political parties they support? Is it the party an individual supports making them to be conservative or liberal minded? Does party ideology trump party preference? What would make a political party electable in the eyes of the people? How has history shaped the political ideologies? In a diverse country such as that of South Africa, these questions matter in understanding the political sphere. The ideological premises of South African political parties spun across matters of socialism, liberalism, conservatism and nationalism. Some of the major political parties such as the Democratic Alliance (DA), African National Congress (ANC), the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and minor parties reflect some of these ideological premises. The ANC is centred around socialism and nationalism, advocating for racial redress, transformation and socioeconomic justice equality. The DA is rooted within liberalism with much focus on free market and constitutionalist principles. This is seen in their race-neutral policies and governance practices within their municipalities for example in the Western Cape and emphasis of individual rights and equality before the law. The EFF on the other hand have a radical socialist stance that focuses on land expropriation without compensation and wealth distribution. Smaller parties for example the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and Freedom Front Plus (FF+) are conservative minority parties emphasizing nationalism values that advocate for select minority groups such as the Zulu and Afrikaner respectively. All the above-mentioned groups fall within the political spectrum which ranges within ‘left – centre – right’. This does not simply mean ideological discourse exclusively falls on either leftist, centrist or rightist. Sometimes there are hybrid approaches to the party ideology as observed in South Africa.
Left – Centre – Right
“The ‘left’ is alone in centring (e.g.) anti-capitalism, class emancipation and productive labour; the ‘centre’ has the most to say about parliamentary democracy, the social market economy and cultural tolerance; and the ‘right’ is more or less the undisputed home for religious influence, civil security and tradition” (Ostrowski, 2023: 5). All three although different they offer contextualization around social ordering. The hybridization of the ideological clusters proves the sometimes-overlapping nature of political ideology for example the ‘centre-left’ and ‘centre-right’. This suggests a relative place with which political parties may ‘give in’ for progressive advantage. Areas of giving in may include the market, the nation, divinity etc offering a shared stance of purposefully advocating for equality. Drawing on South African politics, the leftist would include EFF. They are more interested in evenly sharing power, overturning prevailing social orders and creating new opportunities through drastic actions ranging from ‘incendiary agitation to institutional force to violent revolution’ (Ostrowski, 2023: 9). For the centrist, they are interested in keeping the best and getting rid of the worst social order aspects. They aim to reform without necessarily tearing apart social fabrics. This promotes empowerment were reasonably necessary. The rightist is interested in preserving and possibly restoring lost traditions. They stress the importance of preserving lost traditions, drawing on nostalgia of what was and basing nation futures on the stability of their leadership. The rightist includes parties like the IFP and FF+. The centre-left or centre-right suggest some ‘giving in’ tendencies either from a left or right perspective. The centre-left include parties like the ANC, while the centre-right include parties like the DA. Although not exhaustive we may begin to understand the political identities and policy advocations for political parties. This may help explain the political landscape we find ourselves in and possibly explain some prevailing electoral realities.
The case of South Africa
South Africa has since suffered from hegemonic party rule (Lancaster, 2017). With a long history of party dominance by the African National Congress (ANC), debates have erupted to explain the long-standing dominance in national politics. Some reasons have included, the weak or failing opposition (Krauss and Pekkanen, 2019), ideological irrelevance of the opposition parties (Poteete, 2012), large numbers of independent voters (Davis and Coleman, 2014) and unitary governance structures (Scheiner, 2018) amongst others. Although this reveals there are many factors contributing to political party continuous relevance and dominance, these factors may differ from one state to another. In South Africa the hegemonic party reality lies deeply rooted within its social cleavages. It is not simply a matter of choosing party A from party B. ANC’s history is tied to the liberation struggle drawing in inherited individual loyalties to the struggle. Marginalization realities such as that of apartheid meant sizeable numbers of people did not have any power, and with the transition into liberation, such groups of people sought ways to maintain states of power. Within the political party systems it meant, party ideology was framed around empowerment, liberalisation, nostalgia, and victimhood. This victimhood is what motivates the resilience and resistance struggles observed by such political parties. The constant reminders of the struggle underlie the party efforts to ensure supporters preserve their party obligations across generations. It could be observed that the victimhood and nostalgic preservations within liberatory political parties places them in positions that reject any form of coexistence. This protects and promotes their hegemony within party politics thereby encouraging one-party states. But is this productive for the state? As conservative in nature, hegemonic liberal political parties raise questions as to the sustained leadership they have within states. Are they kept in power as a result of their conservative political ideology or simply party preference? Are voters aligned to the ideology or history? Is the political ideology framed around liberation legacies sustainable?
Understanding Ideology
Ideology has re-emerged as an important topic of late. Although it reveals the political party’s personality, attitude and behaviour or motivations (see Federico & Napier, 2009), some researchers still claim it has had little impact on public political attitudes (Kinder & Kalmoe, 2017). Despite this however, as a blueprint tool for any political party, it has become a topic of inquiry within political and socioeconomic spheres. It is important for example in advocating or explaining gender quota support (Dadson-Schmich, 2006), serving as guiding action for policy. It also helps in unifying or mobilizing select groups for example through nationalism thereby motivating for identity-based solidarities. Furthermore, it helps differentiate political parties from one another and helps draw out voters or candidates who align with party mandates. Although there has been debate around the reasons behind party cohesion, discussions have long focused on the candidature pool. The ability for political parties to attract diverse candidates’ pools rests heavily on the political party ideologies. Whether left (liberal), right (conservative) or within the centre of the pollical spectrum and subsequent candidature pool, it is important to understand the implications of each ideology. This is important especially in understanding or strategizing around voter pool attractions.
Can ideologies shift?
The case of ANC
South Africa’s ideological spectrum appears to be shifting with the emerging pressures from new parties such as uMkhonto weSizwe (MK), Rise Mzansi, BOSA etc, civic formations and issue-driven activism for example the antimigration campaigns by Dudula Operation. The MK party has gained traction presenting fragmentation of the liberatory political party – ANC. MK party does not necessarily present a new political ideology but appears to be a contrast of disaffection of the ANC party. It emerged in 2023 as a breakaway party from the ANC and draws heavily on ANC’s liberation legacy. As a leftist party it centres on populist-nationalist and redistributive rhetoric. The implication of its presence is that it intensifies fragmentation within the liberation tradition posing instability within the ANC faction. Secondly it re-energizes the redistributive grievances such as the land expropriation without compensation with special focus on rural communities who may have felt left out by ANC land ownership redress efforts. This pushes the ideological spectrum into far-leftist wings. As a party framed as a championing force: against elites, the ‘white monopoly capital’; advocating for social welfare expansion; pushing for radical economic transformation that hopes to see the historically disadvantaged groups benefit, it pushes a populist and nationalist framed ideology that draws in mass supporters from rural and peri-rural communities within the country. With their gained traction, it toppled the ANC’s party dominance within politics leading up to coalition informed politics. Although the MK rejected the idea of joining the Government of National Unity (GNU), it remains a lens with which to determine ideological purity within the country.
As a party that draws on the liberation legacy, the MK party challenges the ANC in many ways. As the self-proclaimed true inheritor of the armed struggle, it challenges the ANC symbolic monopoly over the liberation legacy. The continued disaffection of the ANC places ANC in a very vulnerable state that risks it losing its legitimacy as well as appearing as elitist driven. ANC’s hybrid ‘ism’ of centre-left risks shifting towards centrist ideology. The continued stance of stability, coalition-driven governance encouraged by the ANC, nudges them into a governance-centred approach that values balance and sustainability over radical redistributive reform. This has huge implications on the voter pool desperately pushing for redistributive appeals. It is therefore necessary for ANC to rethink its coalition pragmatism and think through their initial ideological stance. Although change is the natural order of life, it must be well thought through in order to avoid devastating loss in the voter pool.
The case of the DA
The DA which largely focuses on a ‘non-racial’ ideological stance drew much needed criticism in the Western Cape province, especially in a country deeply rooted in racial political rhetoric. Such a stance overlooks the structural inequalities made possible through structural violences deeply embedded in our societies. The othering performed through racism is not a matter of separation of black and white, but it goes deeper to shape the socioeconomic nature of the state further perpetuating inequality. By failing to recognise marginalised communities, policy reform or redress is left inadequate. This may affect the voter attractions, capping numbers. This is essential to understand as we have the issue of the ‘alternative middle’ voting population (often not aligned with any ‘ism’ – leftism, centrism, rightism e.g. Students, professionals etc) which tends to vote either way through various persuasions. Residing mostly in the urban spaces their voting preferences are motivated by service delivery, inclusivity, anti-corruption and economic growth plans. It is therefore important to recognise the key implications of party ideologies as they have lasting consequences on the policy reform and overall party performance which can attract voter pool.
Political forecast
As I mentioned earlier, political ideology is not exclusively categorised into the different ‘isms’, sometimes it may have hybrid approaches as seen in the centre-left and centre-right wings. Additionally, a new trend is emerging one of retracted hybridity. This is seen in the instance of issue-driven activism or new political party pressures emerging as stark contrasts of major political party ideology. The continued efforts of the leftist parties such as the EFF and MK will continue to capture the disaffected ANC supporters. Both founding members that is Julius Malema and ex-President Jacob Zuma respectively, highlight the growing fragmented populist and redistributive rhetoric. With the growing struggles of the ANC efforts in merging its centrist governance identity (as seen in its willingness to participate in coalition informed politics) and grassroot appeals, it will lead to further defections within the support base. The populist movements as seen within the region such as the Kenyan “hustler” vs “dynasties” general election framing by the then Deputy President William Ruto, afforded him a presidential position. His “Hustler Nation” approach appealed to a lot of young people who make up most of the voting population. This and other populist movements for example Zambia’s Anti-elite mobilizations, Uganda’s – People Power Movement, Tanzania’s Chadema and Youth populism etc all provide reinforcement of populist centred political ideologies further pushing ideological polarization and leftist party relevance. This may cause instability in the state but also encourages the amplification of marginalised voices particularly within redistributive rhetoric.
The growing need for civic accountability as seen by the growing civic society organisations aimed at pushing for institutionalised accountability pushes South Africa into a managerial style of governance. This is seen in the service delivery and anti-corruption watchdog tendencies (additionally, the Commission of Inquiry activities) that aim to keep political parties accountable to their promises and responsibilities. While this ensures institutional reform and stability, there is risk of alienating marginalised communities especially in light of coalition governing which sees opportunities of ideological flexibilities or trade-offs which may mask grassroot based appeals.
Recommendations and Summary
While party preference sometimes takes precedence over political ideology as exemplified by the prevailing hegemonic party leadership within most liberal countries, it does not mean it is the only factor explaining voter behaviour. Political ideology also matters as it serves as the blueprint of any party, guiding and mobilizing likeminded individuals’ – voter or candidates. It is with this parties should try to align their ideologies to everyday needs for relatability as well as practice inclusivity and maintain credibility. For either ‘ism’ – leftism, centrism or rightism, particular ideas are engraved. With the hybridization it suggests, these “isms” are not zero-sum but, capable of being redesigned. Furthermore, despite falling on either side of the ‘left – centre – right’ political spectrum, context specific politics is very much necessary.
Political parties therefore need to strategically work through ideological frameworks which relate to the everyday struggles such as unemployment, inequality and poverty. Transparency and inclusivity are also important to consider. Despite having ideology, a party’s performance is what matters most. There is need for credible governance systems which centre around anti-corruption and emphasize equitable and pragmatic solutions.
For the voter, party preference cannot be the only reason to vote. Slogans or promises are not enough if not backed up by performance and feasible action. There is need to evaluate party legacies and party deliverables. Policy advocations are also necessary to understand as these impact social ordering. Staying informed beyond relying on trends, propaganda and populistic rhetoric is also necessary. Engaging different sources will help in understanding the different angles of any burning topic within the political landscape.
Thelma Nyarhi is a Researcher at the Democracy Development Program (DDP) and writes in her own capacity.
References
Davidson-Schmich, Louise K. (2006) ‘Implementation of Political Party Gender Quotas: Evidence from the German La¨nder 1990–2000’, Party Politics 12: 211–32.
Davis, C.L. and Coleman, K.M., 2014. Electoral Change in the One-Party Dominant Mexican Polity, 1958–73: Evidence from Mexico City. In Parties, Elections, and Political Participation in Latin America (pp. 223-241). Routledge.
Krauss, E.S. and Pekkanen, R.J., 2019. The rise and fall of Japan's LDP: political party organizations as historical institutions. Cornell University Press.
Ostrowski, M.S., 2023. The ideological morphology of left–centre–right. Journal of Political Ideologies, 28(1), pp.1-15.
Poteete, A.R., 2012. Electoral competition, factionalism, and persistent party dominance in Botswana. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 50(1), pp.75-102.
Scheiner, F. 2018. Democracy Without Competition; Ottaway, ‘Opposition Parties and Democracy’; Poteete, ‘Electoral Competition, Factionalism’; Greene, Why Dominant Parties Lose; Pempel, Uncommon Democracies.
