60 years since the Sharpeville Massacre. Photo: Provided
South Africans celebrate Human Rights Day every year by drawing attention to the historical and political significance of the day. Sixty-nine people were killed on March 21, 1960 during a demonstration against an unjust pass law. This massacre illuminated the brutality of the apartheid state and increased the need to use armed resistance to challenge the authoritarianism prevalent in society.
The official adoption of the democratic Constitution in the parliament in 1996 marked a change towards a society that protects basic political, socio-economic and civil liberties. Former president Thabo Mbeki, who delivered the speech “I am African” on this occasion, stated that the Constitution “recognizes the fact that the dignity of the individual is a goal that must be pursued by society and is a goal that cannot be separated from the material well-being of the individual”.
He mentioned the importance of tackling political and socio-economic injustice together. Democratic consolidation and the substantive realization of human rights require the democratization of politics, economics and other social institutions. The lived experiences of South Africans and the policy evidence examined show that this vision of human rights is far from complete.
The country ranks highly in several international comparative indices of democracy and civil liberties, such as Freedom House and the Ibrahim Index of African Governance, but performs poorly in key socio-economic and human development indicators. High levels of socio-economic exclusion, poverty, inequality and uneven spatial development characterize post-1994 South Africa. Unequal race, gender and class relations permeate this exclusive socio-economic structure, which often leads to conflict in what author Karl von Holdt describes as a violent democracy.
Therefore, many citizens believe that the human rights that are celebrated every year have not addressed historical injustices or significantly improved their livelihoods. In other words, systemic race, class and gender inequality in the economic structure undermines the consolidation of democracy in South Africa. The lack of economic and social policies limits efforts aimed at democratizing the country’s economy to address past and present socio-economic injustices.
These policy choices, based on the prescriptions of dominant international financial institutions, continue to fail in South Africa. The policy directive prioritizes a market-led development model that promotes labor market flexibility, reduces financial exchange controls, privatizes public goods and reduces welfare support as core steps for sustainable economic development.
They also pressure the governments of less developed countries to implement rigid macro-economic targets, which focus on the spread of debt, attracting private investment and targeting inflation. We need an alternative economic and social policy framework based on human rights, highlighting the following points to transition beyond market-led democracy.
First, we need a broader concept of labor and livelihood development that does not limit society to wage-led industrial labor as the only solution to the employment crisis. The South African economy is (historically) managed by large companies operating in the private sector and public sector markets at different levels of government.
Society’s thinking about work and livelihood is limited to formal wage labor or economic participation in these institutions. However, innovative ideas are emerging on various policy strategies to address the socio-economic crisis in South Africa that offer other policy options to increase decent work and support community-led livelihood strategies. These proposals reflect the effects of new low-carbon and digital technologies.
In addition, there is a call for more emphasis on the care economy and its relationship to develop the social security system. Redistribution and social transfer interventions are positioned as enablers of multiple livelihood options rather than non-productive expenditure line items.
Second, the labor and industrial relations regime of the state must protect the rights of all workers in the economy. Strengthening workers’ rights, institutional supervision and adapting laws to structural labor market changes are essential to achieve these goals. Several case studies of industrial relations conflicts and the ongoing exploitation of workers illustrate that human rights violations are still prevalent in the labor market.
Racial, gender, class and national inequalities determine the form and pattern of exploitation. And there are sectors, such as domestic work, retail, construction and hospitality, where labor-related human rights violations are more common.
Furthermore, the restructuring of the labor market throughout the economy, based on emerging technologies or lean business models, has increased this trend in many cases. Technological and industrial upgrading is shown as a change in product markets and light business operations by large companies. Supporters promote efficiency, profitability and production cost benefits associated with these technological innovations. But the technology is also being used to undermine workers’ rights, collective bargaining and exponentially lower labor costs. This is alarming because labor market disparity is a major cause of socio-economic inequality.
Third, there is a need to draw from the policy literature on interesting economic experiments that diverge from market-led democratic policy prescripts. Alternatives such as solidarity economy, eco-socialism, circular economy and social economy are instructive. This development model challenges market superiority, concentrated ownership patterns, ecological destruction and labor exploitation.
The alternative encourages us to think about economic development beyond the limits of growth measured using market or financial indicators, such as gross domestic product assessments and rating agencies. All these models put indicators of human development, equal access to public goods and broader non-market social returns at the center of economic development.
In summary, human well-being, universal human rights, socio-economic inclusion and social compensation should be central economic policy targets in South Africa.