Networks of influence: a theoretical review and proposed approach to AIDS treatment activism

Dear Sir

As reported in your newspaper, a group of concerned South Africans are travelling to Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories next week in order to highlight the intolerable conditions created by the Occupation. The composition of the group is notable for the high moral standing and strong human rights track record of its members, as well as for its inclusion of both Jews and Muslims.

Unfortunately, the debate about Israel and Palestine in South Africa has too often been characterised by blind loyalty to one side or another and fruitless disputes about the origins of the state of Israel. Any productive debate must take as its point of departure (1) the indubitable fact that the Occupation (and the violent and oppressive measures required to maintain it) infringes upon the most basic rights and aspirations of Palestinians; (2) that violence against civilians (whether Israeli or Palestinian) can under no circumstances be justified; (3) that violent resistance against Israel has not served the Palestinian cause; and (4) that every Israeli and Palestinian has the right to live securely in a state that recognises their civil and political rights.

It is time to shift the debate away from the false dichotomy of Israeli security and Palestinian rights, and to start the difficult process of ending the Occupation and the violence, and fashioning a negotiated settlement based on the recognition of the human rights of every inhabitant of the region. If this delegation contributes to such a shift, it will have been an immensely important initiative.

Yours sincerely,
Eduard Grebe
Cape Town

Abstract

The topic of AIDS activism cuts across disciplines, is complex, under-theorised and does not lend itself to neat theoretical explication. Furthermore, the story of the relationship between activism and the broad societal response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic is still emerging, is deeply contextual and its analysis requires rich empirical description. But since such a project is necessarily shaped by prior theoretical assumptions, this paper reviews a set of potential approaches for their explicatory potential and ability to inform an ethically engaged discussion. These approaches are broadly categorised as the sociology of political contention (most specifically social movement theory) and the political philosophy of civil society (including notions of global civil society). The focus is on the transnational dimension of activism, which has been especially critical in AIDS activism. I argue for a network approach to political contention and for a conception of transnational networks as ‘networks of influence’ that incorporate a wide range of actors, including (but not restricted to) the activists normally referred to in transnational advocacy networks. Such an approach is better able to account for the transnational dimension than traditional sociological approaches that exhibit a domestic and state-centric bias. Furthermore (following Keck and Sikkink), I propose a focus on transnational networks as formations that are capable of leveraging powerful actors, information flows and symbolic and accountability politics, but go beyond simplistic formulations such as the ‘boomerang pattern’. I conclude that only such an approach �?? and a willingness to be guided by the empirical and historical reality of AIDS activism �?? will allow us to make sense of the phenomenon.

In his foreword to Shades of Difference, former President Nelson Mandela says �??Mac put the struggle for the freedom of South Africa above everything in his life.�?? Whatever flaws Mac Maharaj may have, this is certainly true. For this reason, and because of the central role he played in it, a study of Maharaj�??s life is also a study of the struggle. It is often argued that in order to build a better future it is necessary to come to terms with the past �?? particularly in a country with a history such as ours. Padraig O�??Malley has produced a very important contribution to this task.

Mac Maharaj was imprisoned for thirteen years for his underground activities as a member of the SACP in the 1950s and early 1960s. After his arrest he was brutally tortured, but never betrayed his comrades. While being incarcerated on Robben Island, he became close to Mandela and Walter Sisulu, and smuggled Madiba�??s autobiography out of prison. After his release, he went into exile and worked full time for the ANC, winning the trust also of OR Tambo (largely because he was one of the most able and resourceful leaders in the ANC). In the 1980s he led the ANC�??s efforts to rebuild its underground organisation inside South Africa �?? often at great personal risk.

Shades of Difference has an unusual format. The first half of each chapter is introduced by O�??Malley and the second half is in Maharaj�??s own words (based on extensive interviews) �?? Mandela calls this �??two brutal honesties clashing�??. The introductions sketch the context of the events related by Maharaj, and provide an independent perspective. O�??Malley�??s sympathetic yet critical account does not spare Maharaj, other liberation leaders or the ANC itself from having their failings pointed out. For example, the almost exclusive reliance on a strategy of armed struggle in the 1970s and 80s resulted in very little progress until internal mobilisation not led by the ANC �?? the Soweto uprisings and later the United Democratic Front and Mass Democratic Movement �?? started to shake the apartheid regime�??s hold on power.

Maharaj�??s account, on the other hand, gives one a clear impression of the immense odds against which they were working, as well as of the tremendous personal sacrifices made by so many in the struggle. By honestly presenting the story of Mac Maharaj, Shades of Difference will do much to help us understand our history, and therefore also our present and future. This is a book that should be read by every South African.

Abstract

This paper argues that there is a tradition of philosophical critique which starts with Hegel�??s dialectics and was developed, each time in a slightly different direction, by Marx, by the thinkers of the Frankfurt School and reaches its most compelling contemporary articulation in the work of Derrida�??the primary exponent of poststructuralist philosophy. This tradition of critique turns on a certain negativity: operations of negation and the recognition of difference. It is argued that this approach represents an attempt at coming to terms with contingency. While it is true that negativity and negation provide the driving force of the Hegelian dialectic, difference is ultimately reduced to a mere internal moment of a greater and more original unity, and is thereby robbed of its originary significance. In Adorno�??s philosophy, however, negativity is developed away from the totalising re-appropriation of non-identity with an ever greater emphasis on difference, in which the dialectical movement amplifies the dimension of negativity in a �??negative dialectics�?? rather than arresting it in reconciliation. In this sense, Derrida�??s work can be read as a continuation and radicalisation of Adorno�??s project, with différance as the notion that embodies this negativity most directly.

Full paper: Negativity and critique in Adorno and Derrida

Two major developments of the last two decades have radically undermined traditional justifications of leftist politics: the failure of twentieth century `socialist’ experiments, and what might be termed the de-essentialising movement in contemporary philosophy. However, the social injustices that animated revolutionary thinkers in many respects remain, and some have arguably worsened in the era of globalised capitalism. This paper investigates whether it is possible to articulate a new theoretical underpinning for progressive politics that nevertheless avoids the essentialist moves of Marxism. Ethico-political readings of Derrida �?? one of the most influential anti-essentialist thinkers �?? are compared to Ernesto Laclau’s attempts at formulating a post-Marxist progressive politics built around the notions of ‘hegemony’ and ‘radical democracy.’ Laclau’s intervention in the Marxist tradition is to deconstruct its traditional categories so as to take account of contingency; his intervention in deconstruction is to introduce what in this paper is described as ‘contestation,’ so as to provide a more coherent account of the political. The paper concludes that neither deconstruction nor radical democracy provides an adequate basis for poltical action, but that the latter’s account of the political is a meaningful development of the theoretical schema articulated by the former and does point to the possibility of a non-essentialist progressive politics.

keywords: aporia, contestation, contingency, deconstruction, Derrida, hegemony, justice, Laclau, Levinas, Marx, ‘the political’, responsibility, undecidability

A version of this paper was presented at the Stellenbosch University Philosophy Department’s postgraduate seminar series. An updated version has been accepted for publication in the journal Philosophy & Social Criticism. I can provide a pre-print on request.

Every citizen, especially citizens who are ANC supporters and voters, those who have no interest in rising in the party hierarchy, have a duty to speak in public about policy, ideas and programmes. Such speech must be critical for criticism is the definitive element of loyalty.

It has become customary for senior members of the ANC and the Alliance to say that the divisions in the ruling party that have emerged over the �??succession debate�?? are harming the party and the country. They are right, but the solution, they seem to suggest, is to unite behind one candidate, to silence the debate or at best to effect reconciliation between the camps. However, �??unity�?? brokered by sweeping �??disunity�?? or disagreement under the carpet is false. This would simply entrench the culture of backroom manoeuvring and politicking that threatens to completely exclude ANC voters, and the public at large, from a debate of the most profound importance to all of us.

The alternative to infighting and back biting is not complete consensus, but debate. In fact, that is precisely what we need �?? open, public debate. This is the only antidote to the poisoned political atmosphere in which supporting or opposing particular (undeclared) candidates can wreck one�??s career. Debate (as opposed to politicking) does not focus on individuals, but on values. The important question is not who will be our next president, but what values he or she will embody.

But people in our country, particularly progressive and ANC-aligned ones, should not wait for our leaders to provide us with the opportunity to debate our collective future. The opportunity is there if we take it. This evening there will be one such opportunity for open public debate in Manenberg. The Progressive ANC Voters Network will hold its first public meeting, at which residents of Manenberg and others will have the chance to raise their concerns and views. It will be a small meeting funded through small citizens�?? efforts.

Why Manenberg, you might ask. Why a �??coloured�?? area �??riddled by gansterism and crime�?? and known for voter apathy, and, among those who do vote, staunch DA support? Well, precisely for those reasons. The people of Manenberg are not politically disaffected without reason: if mainstream politics, and the ANC structures in particular, do not engage their criticism we will fail to build African, coloured and white unity. This engagement represents both an opportunity and a responsibility. If we are afraid of tackling political disaffection head-on, what chance do we have of reversing it?

The network is not a political party or faction and it does not claim to be able to solve social problems in Manenberg or elsewhere. It is a small network that aims to bring together individuals who vote for or support the ANC in public spaces where they are able to debate our future. But it may contribute to a new spirit of public participation in politics, and it may help communities reclaim the ANC from the careerists and opportunists that President Mbeki has rightly warned us against. Many of the founders of the network are young activists who do not have a long tradition of service in the ANC, and some will certainly call our actions impertinent. But we are proud to continue a tradition of youth activism and appropriate impertinence, the rekindling of which is key to building our future. Sustained engagement by young people, workers and working class people and progressive ANC supporters of all classes will also help ensure the party is never dominated by vested interests and personal ambition.

Since its inception almost a century ago, the ANC has consistently been the most progressive force in South African politics. At a time when narrow nationalism, imperialism and racial politics were the norm throughout the world, the ANC espoused a doctrine of non-racialism and inclusive democracy. It stuck to its progressive values throughout the long years of the struggle, and only a return to these values will solve the problems we now face.

But what are these progressive values? They are perhaps best articulated in the Freedom Charter, and include a pro-poor and pro-working class tradition firmly committed to the eradication of poverty and social inequality; unwavering commitment to the equality and liberation of women, non-racialism, and action against tribalism, xenophobia, homophobia and all forms of discrimination. The ANC must also vigilantly guard its commitment to constitutional democracy built on a strong and accountable legislature and independent judiciary. Needless to say, intolerance of and strong action against all forms of corruption is critical.

The vision of a non-sexist, non-racial and prosperous South Africa must be transformed into a practical 21st century programme for the ANC. If the ANC returns to its traditional progressive values, while at the same time building a modern, open and vibrantly democratic party, it will successfully steer through the current crisis and emerge again as a party worthy to lead. South Africa deserves and expects no less.

This article appeared in the Cape Times of 28 March 2007. It was also published on the PAVN blog.

His disingenuous suggestion that the shocking rise in in the number of registered deaths is merely the result of improved death registration and therefore nothing to worry about, is based on misinterpretations and what can be none other than deliberate distortion of the data.

Malan suggests that the increases in registered deaths are primarily the result of improved registration and not the HIV epidemic. However, there are two glaring features of the data that he fails to account for. First, the age-distribution of registered deaths is completely contrary to the distribution in any normal country: in South Africa, adult deaths are concentrated in the population of working and sexually active age, whereas in countries without a devastating Aids epidemic, adult deaths are concentrated among older people. This is shown very clearly, and disturbingly, by the graph below of deaths by age in 2003 derived from Stats SA. How could Malan account for this distribution other than by a devastating HIV epidemic? (Incidentally, I use 2003 rather than 2004, because recorded deaths in the latest year for which Stats SA reports are often not all accounted for.)

Read the rest of this article here. Originally published on aidstruth.org.