High participation pushes opposition
With respect to unexpected high voter participation (77.3 percent of registered people/ 59 percent of all people over 18 years) at South Africans elections, the IEC extended the opening of polling stations until the next day. On the April 22, the IEC announced the official results for the national level (as well as for the municipal level). The ANC lost share (-3.8 percent) and did not reach the two third by a hair’s breath, while the major opposition parties won.
The Cope turned out to be the most successful start up party since 1994 and is now the second major opposition party. The Cope challenge was to take over 20 percent of the ANC share, but the ANC only lost almost 4. What about the over 3 percent, which won Cope? Keeping in mind first that the Cope split off from the ANC and second the ANC is a left wing party, it seems visible that the Cope positioned rather on ANC’s right side, where all other parties are positioned as well. But, where exactly is the Cope positioned? On one side, the Cope is a young party, with a manifesto close to the ANC, founded by former ANC members. On the other side, opposition parties like ID, UDM, IFP and DA are positioned more distanced, because their ideology is more independent rooted. And the ideolgical distance between ANC and DA is most distinctive. The cluster of ID, UDM and IFP lost overall 6 percent. Following this, isn’t it possible, that the Cope is positioned exactly between these three parties (cluster) and the ANC? The Cope probably took over share from both sides, ANC and the party cluster. Additionally the mobilization of voters seems to be made by the Cope. Remember, the participation was unexpected high with 2 Mio. caste votes more than in 2004. The ANC benefits from high participation with 770.000 additional votes and the Cope total votes are 1.3 Mio.
The DA share increased by more than 4 percent and unifies additional 1 Mio. votes – compared with in 2004. The DA is a liberal party with mainly White and Indian voters (superficial said). This population makes a share of 12 percent of all inhabitants. Where did the DA fetch the other 4.5 percent? Obviously race does not play a role for the electorate, because 4.5 percent of blacks vote the DA (or rather more if it is allowed to break down 59 percent participation equal to the White and Indian population). There can be two reasons for that choice. The one reason can be the social engagement of the DA, which is a key issue in South Africa. Especially in terms of AIDS/HIV, where the ANC rather argues suspect (with beetroot, garlic and shower), while the DA campaigns aggressively in townships. And the other reason lies in an increasing share of economic successful people, who probably prefer liberal politics than socialist or even Marxist politics of the left wing party spectrum. These successful people could also have switched from the cluster parties to a party with a higher chance for alternative politics.
Summarizing the argumentation on party system above, the schema could look like following enumeration (from left to right): ANC – Cope – ID, UDM, and IFP – DA. Surprising for European experiences is that small parties benefit from high voter participation. Does South Africa up side down or on the way to materialize a party system without predominance as proportional representation usually generates?
Entry filed under: South Africa. Tags: 1994, 2004, 2009, AIDS/HIV, ANC, benefit, campaigning, Cope, DA, economy, elections, ID, ideology, IFP, left wing party, Marxist, mobilization, non-voter, opposition, participation, party system, predominance, proportional representation, race, social, socialist, South Africa, townships, UDM.