No abstract

No abstract

A heated debate developed in South Africa as to the meaning of 'deliberative democracy'. This debate is fanned by the claims of 'traditional leaders' that their ways of village-level deliberation and consensus-oriented decision-making are not only a superior process for the African continent as it evolves from pre-colonial tradition, but that it represents a form of democracy that is more authentic than the Western version. Proponents suggest that traditional ways of deliberation are making a come-back because imported Western models of democracy that focus on the state and state institutions miss the fact that in African societies state institutions are often seen as illegitimate or simply absent from people's daily lives. In other words, traditional leadership structures are more appropriate to African contexts than their Western rivals. Critics suggest that traditional leaders, far from being authentic democrats, are power-hungry patriarchs and authoritarians attempting to both re-invent their political, social and economic power (frequently acquired under colonial and apartheid rule) and re-assert their control over locallevel resources at the expense of the larger community. In this view, the concept of deliberative democracy is being misused as a legitimating device for a politics of patriarchy and hierarchy, which is the opposite of the meaning of the term in the European and US sense. This article attempts to contextualise this debate and show how the efforts by traditional leaders to capture an intermediary position between rural populations and the state is fraught with conflicts and contradictions when it comes to forming a democratic state and society in post-apartheid South Africa.

The global neoliberal economic and political order impregnated the emergence of democracy in South Africa. One of the hallmarks of this order is that the capacity of the state to transform society is constrained, particularly in the rural hinterlands. The incapacity of the state to extend its grip, both economically and politically, has provided traditional leaders with an opportunity to both recast themselves as intermediaries between state and society and elevate themselves to decision makers on behalf of large communities. The article examines the way in which traditional leaders have repositioned themselves in the new democracy, what their source of support is, and why the African National Congress government has come to support these efforts.

Edward LiPuma is a professor of anthropology at the University of Miami special-izing in the character of globalization and its implications for politics and culture. He is the author of Encompassing Others: The Magic of Modernity in Melane-sia (2000) and the coauthor (with Benjamin Lee) of Financial Derivatives and the Globalization of Riskk (2004) and the forthcoming The Political Culture of Democracy in South Africa (with Thomas Koelble). Thomas Koelble, a political scientist, teaches in the Graduate School of Business at the University of Cape Town and studies economic globalization, democratic theory, and traditional leadership in South Africa. His publications include The Left Unraveled: SocialDemocracy and the New Left Challenge in Britain and West Germany (1991) and The Global Economy and Democracy in South Africa (1998).