Democracy’s Embedded Paradoxes: Are Violent Protests the New Discourse?

South Africans value their institutions of trust, perceiving them as the protectors and guarantors of the collective good. Combined within the frameworks of laws, anti-poverty programs and democratic mechanisms government’s commitment to the peoples’ needs indicated a commitment to address inequality and accelerate service delivery. However, South Africa’s post-Apartheid landscape remains volatile. Centuries of oppression and racial segregation firmly entrenched inequality and violence, negatively affecting its democratic ethos and economic prosperity. Once paraded as an example for its ‘sensational process of democratisation’ (Bertelsmann Transformation Index, 2003, p.1), SA is now brandished as a ‘failed state’ (Cartwright, 2015, p.1), embedding ‘violent democracy’ (von Holdt, 2014, p.129) and ‘racial economic inequality’ (Kangarlou, 2013, p. 1).

The social environment of politics affirms Social Self-Defence’s (where the social self is transforming into a social self-defence mechanism) place within South Africa’s socio-political landscape. The increase of service delivery protests confirm that top-down leadership and municipal management are ineffective, primarily failing to accommodate their constituencies’ needs and operationalising policies. Debt traps and aloof councilors furthermore diminishes political trust. With 32% of municipalities categorized as dysfunctional, it is clear that democracy’s foot soldiers have failed and that the lies of democracy continue to increase.

Can these embedded paradoxes result in South Africa spiraling out of control, cementing protests and violence as the new discourse? Or will Social Self-Defence serve as the democracy barometer, redirecting leaders towards stability, trust and substantive democracy?