Report on Professor Xolela Mangcu’s Accusation of the ANC Stealing the Concept of Non-Racialism from Sobukwe and the PAC

Professor Xolela Mangcu’s argument begins by tracing the origins of non-racialism to the PAC and Robert Sobukwe, who developed a nuanced and radical critique of the dominant political ideologies of the time. According to Mangcu, Sobukwe’s non-racialism was far more than a simple rejection of racial division; it was an intellectual and political framework aimed at fostering a deep sense of African identity while rejecting the racial hierarchies imposed by colonial and apartheid systems.

Mangcu asserts that Sobukwe and the PAC’s version of non-racialism was rooted in the belief that race is a social construct, and therefore, all people, regardless of skin color, belong to a single human race. Sobukwe famously stated, “There is only one race, the human race,” making it clear that non-racialism, for him, was a rejection of the entire racial categorization imposed by apartheid and colonial systems. In this sense, Sobukwe’s non-racialism was not merely about creating equality among races but about transcending the concept of race altogether.

The PAC’s articulation of non-racialism was also strategic. Mangcu points out that the PAC believed Africans should mobilize themselves and focus on their liberation before engaging with other racial groups. The PAC maintained that black South Africans, through their Africanist ideology, had to reclaim their identity and self-determination. However, Mangcu highlights a key contradiction within the PAC: while the movement professed a non-racial ideology, its membership and rhetoric often focused heavily on African identity, which led to tension and misunderstanding within its own ranks.

This is where Mangcu’s criticism of the ANC becomes sharp. He accuses the ANC of co-opting this radical vision of non-racialism, which was pioneered by Sobukwe and the PAC, and diluting it to fit a more moderate, multiracialist approach that suited its political strategy in the 1980s. Mangcu contends that the ANC’s version of non-racialism was, in fact, rooted in a far more liberal conception of race relations, which allowed for power-sharing between different racial groups rather than the complete dismantling of racial categories.

Mangcu goes further to claim that this ANC version of non-racialism, which gained prominence during the negotiations leading to South Africa’s democratic transition in 1994, was a watered-down and less radical vision. The ANC, according to Mangcu, promoted a kind of multiracial coexistence rather than the more revolutionary and fundamental rejection of racial categories that the PAC envisioned. In Mangcu’s view, the ANC’s approach allowed for the continued existence of racial inequalities under the guise of non-racialism.

This co-option, Mangcu argues, has had long-term consequences for South Africa’s political landscape. He critiques the ANC’s non-racialism as having become a tool for avoiding deeper conversations about systemic racial inequalities. Mangcu points out that by framing non-racialism as the absence of race-based policies, the ANC has allowed significant racial disparities in wealth, education, and employment to persist without adequately addressing them. This version of non-racialism, according to Mangcu, has essentially muted the more radical anti-racist discourse that was at the heart of Sobukwe’s and the PAC’s political ideology.

Furthermore, Mangcu claims that the ANC’s appropriation of non-racialism contributed to the marginalization of the PAC’s contributions to the liberation struggle. He asserts that in the dominant narratives of South African history, the PAC’s role and Sobukwe’s intellectual leadership have been overshadowed by the ANC’s more prominent position. The ANC’s global stature as the leading liberation movement, Mangcu argues, has led to a rewriting of history where key PAC figures and ideas are often left out of the mainstream discourse.

By accusing the ANC of “stealing” non-racialism from the PAC, Mangcu challenges the popular perception of the ANC as the sole visionary force behind South Africa’s transition to democracy. He emphasizes that the ANC’s embrace of non-racialism in the 1980s was not an original idea but one that was borrowed from the PAC and then adapted to serve its own political purposes. This, according to Mangcu, has led to a version of non-racialism that is less effective in dismantling the deeply entrenched racial and economic inequalities that continue to plague South African society.

In conclusion, Professor Mangcu’s lecture sheds light on a critical and often overlooked aspect of South Africa’s liberation history. His accusation that the ANC appropriated non-racialism from Sobukwe and the PAC challenges the dominant narrative and urges a reevaluation of the intellectual contributions of figures like Robert Sobukwe. By doing so, Mangcu calls for a more honest engagement with the complexities of race and non-racialism in post-apartheid South Africa, one that acknowledges the unfinished work of addressing systemic inequalities.