Ramaphosa, an obstacle to South Africa's progress

"Cyril Ramaphosa ... the fact no president since Nelson Mandela enjoyed such overwhelming public support and goodwill as he did in 2018. It is his own doing history will remember him as the biggest disappointment since 1994", Max du Preez writes in VryeWeekblad on July 14.

We hear statements like this a lot lately, especially since continuous load shedding last year. Before there was growing disquiet from Ramaphorias and former Ramaphorias - media, analysts and business - but not the anger and disappointment at the man Du Preez expresses now. 

I say since load shedding because more than anything Ramaphosa and government did or didn't do, that revealed the true, decrepit state of the nation under the ANC. Eskom's virtual collapse is affecting South Africa deeply, in the pocket, that even smarmy, cowardly business leaders, loathe to criticise government under normal circumstances, has joined the chorus of condemnation.

For the first four years of Ramaphosa's presidency, leniency was shown him despite failing to meet promises he made to fix the country's serious problems, one of which is economic growth and investment that Du Preez doesn't mention. This indulgence, not so much by the public but liberal-left media, analysts, etc who form public opinion, faltered as time went on into threadbare excuses for his failures. This week Ramaphosa himself mentioned them: Covid, the economic downturn. 

But SA's peers seem to have bounced back from the pandemic and the country's prolonged poor economic performance is largely due to the ANC's mismanagement. It's like a player blaming the pitch for his poor performance when other players on the same pitch are doing well.

Ramaphoster (a deliberate misspelling) is the person he always was. So it's not that he's a disappointment per se, but that his supporters - CR17 Ramaphorias - had unrealistic expectations in the first place. While I understand we yearned for someone - anyone - who'd deliver us from Zuma's hell, how could any rational person who knew even a little of how the ANC operates believe Ramaphosa would be better? The heart said he should be but the head knew it was impossible.

There's a photo on the internet of Ramaphosa sitting next to Zuma at what must've been a cabinet meeting. Both are semi-reclined in their seats, well-fed bellies straining their belts. They are turned to face the camera and wear shit-eating grins. 

In 2018 his acolytes in the media and elsewhere said he was the "skilled negotiator" who was "biding his time before taking control" of the cabinet, government and ANC and would bring huge investment that would lead to growth and prosperity.  But that photo is the real Ramaphosa: comfortable, at ease as a loyal cadre who'd eaten well, helping to enforce (eg cadre deployment which he led) whatever Zuma and ANC wanted and wants, not the deluded, psychotropic-induced image his followers had of the purported ethical reformer and super-efficient manager and CEO. 

Ramaphosa's putative qualities were a myth, more CR17 marketing hype than reality. What did he really create as businessman? Nothing. He, like other BEE multi-millionaires, was gifted shares and/or money by the then nervous white ruler-owners of the country's economy. In exchange the ANC permitted them to maintain the apartheid-era status quo: a monopolistic, oligarchical economy that still exists to a large degree today. This is one reason why in 30 years growth has been moribund except for a brief window when SA reaped the benefits of Mandela and early Mbeki investor goodwill.

While I understand ordinary citizens would be fooled by the Ramaphosa hype, it beggars belief professional political watchers were too. So much that the latter went to extraordinary lengths to defend him, a prime example was (is) the sustained attack on public protector Busisiwe Mkwebane for daring to make findings against him and the liberal-left's other (non)hero at the bridge, Pravin Gordhan. And what conclusions do we draw about subdued response from the same individuals to acting PP Kholeka Gcaleka's Phala Phala whitewash?

I always believed Ramaphosa to be as venal and defective as other ANC, which as an organisation is incorrigible and irredeemable, but he's worse than feared. Even if one had been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in his first year or so - finding his feet, his supporters said; others said he's "not doing too badly[sic]" - one quickly realised he was never going to cut it because he would always put party first, and intrinsically, he's a really really bad leader and manager that public scrutiny, which was absent as a private businessman, revealed. 

He's only a disappointment to those who, for reasons only they know, expected he'd amount to anything. And it's Ramaphorias who must answer for supporting his candidacy as ANC leader and therefore country's president, and for foisting the cult of Ramaphoria on the public.

Ramaphosa is the worst president since 1994 - it takes some doing to beat Zuma -  and one of the worst ever including under apartheid. Under Zuma SA was brought to the edge but there's real and present danger Ramaphosa could take it over.