Jonathan Jansen
HOW does social change happen? On the most fundamental level, it happens through leadership.
The reality of our country is that it is without leadership. That does not mean we do not have several people pretending to be leaders.
Newspapers recently ran front-page stories about a pack of dogs in a squatter camp that apparently mauled a young child to death. The response of people in the community was to hunt down and kill every stray animal they could find.
Where does that behaviour come from?
In
Diepsloot, to the north of Johannesburg, a community recently erupted in anger because of rampant crime, and started to look for culprits. They expressed their despair and rage by beating to death a Zimbabwean man.
Where does this behaviour come from?
We are not far from a South Africa where people who are fed up with poverty and a lack of good governance are starting to look for scapegoats. When that happens, the first level of culprits in our society will be identified by their race, and the second by their ethnicity.
As a nation we have a trauma that is not yet resolved, a deep hurt that has not yet been taken care of. What is lacking is leadership for dealing with our woundedness.
It is not only a crisis of political leadership, it is also a crisis of corporate leadership. We also have a crisis of religious leadership, as is clear from the number of priests said to molest children. We certainly have a crisis of educational leadership, coupled with a crisis of parental leadership, where basic, core values are not taught in the home.
This is not just about Jacob Zuma. It is a crisis that affects all of us, and the change that is so desperately needed must start with each one of us.
Good and effective leadership propels people in the direction of change, but we need to know what kind of leadership we are talking about.
First, we need authoritative leadership, as opposed to authoritarian leadership. Authoritarian leadership bullies people into accepting change from the top. Authoritative leadership accepts the responsibility to lead, consults broadly, then acts on the mandate to change. Authoritative leadership is a prerequisite for social change.
Let’s discuss a recent test of leadership. I am not a particular fan of the Western Cape Education Department, but I believe they are correct in certain areas. An example is their insistence on ensuring that those who mark matric exams are competent to do so.
Not only must a marker have all the usual qualifications, they must also show that the children in the school where they teach a particular subject are achieving more than 70 percent. This had Sadtu up in arms, and it is a resistance that more than ever calls for authoritative leadership on the part of the department. If the Western Cape Education Department gives in on this issue, then we are lost.
Our current political leadership does not have the guts to take on the unions. We are the only country in the world other than Mexico where unions run the schools. I find it particularly revolting that the people who are ruining our township schools have their own children at elite schools. Authoritative leaders have the courage to stand up and put the interests of the children above all other considerations.
Second, we need ethical leadership.
We also have to understand the distinction between ethical leadership and opportunistic leadership. The late RO Dudley, the famous teacher, put it this way in his question to the ruling party: “What do you stand for, and what you will fall for?”
Ethical leadership is based on a core set of beliefs about what is right and wrong, and it applies not just to your government, but also to the way you run your business and live your life as an individual.
It was opportunistic leadership that made a decision that still makes me shudder: when South Africa refused a visa for the Dalai Lama on the grounds that he was a threat to world peace.
If we have the kind of collective leadership that makes decisions based on what is personally convenient, on what will enrich me as a person, based on what is politically correct, then you have the worst kind of opportunistic leadership. And that means we are in serious trouble.
Third, we need broken leadership.
We have to understand the distinction between broken leadership and self-assured leadership. An example of broken leadership can be found in the decision that we took to confront our hurts and allow the four young men from the Reitz hostel at the University of the Free State to continue their studies. The starting point for the leadership was that we are all affected by our terrible past.
Brokenness in leadership starts with the notion that we are all imperfect. Unless I confront my own brokenness, I cannot deal with anyone else’s. It is the opposite of self-assured leadership, the attachment to self-righteousness.
We need more of the uncommon grace that was demonstrated by the Rev Ross Anderson after the St James Church massacre when he met the Apla cadres who had killed 11 members of his congregation. He said to them: “I want to tell you that I am sorry for my role in apartheid.” This is true broken leadership.
Finally, we need exemplary leadership, which teaches you how to live with your neighbour. Nelson Mandela has not led a perfect life, but what was amazing about him is that he used his brokenness to present an exceptional example.
What we now have in South Africa’s political leadership is temporary. It is a madness that will go away. As South Africans, we still have an unbelievable capacity for goodness, but it is going to depend on all of us to restore true leadership.
* Professor Jansen is the vice-chancellor of the University of the Free State. This is an edited version of his Annual Social Change Lecture at the Tertiary School in Business Administration (TSiBA) in Cape Town.