In Africa, Ending a Despot Doesn’t End Despotism

In the tradition of dimming debate, the chattering class has reduced systemic corruption in South Africa and the near collapse in Zimbabwe, respectively, to the shenanigans of two men: Jacob Zuma and Robert Mugabe.
Zuma, the President of South Africa, currently faces possible impeachment for corruption, while Robert Mugabe has now been forcibly ‘retired’ after 30 years as President.
Surely by now, though, it should be common knowledge that in Africa, if you replace a despot, but not despotism, you only oust a tyrant, and not tyranny.
How Kleptocracy Works Emblematic of this is a thematically confused article in The Economist, offering a description of the dynamics set in motion by the Zuma dynasty’s capture of the state.
At first, the magazine explains the concept of ‘state capture’ as “private actors [having] subverted the state to steal public money.”
Later, the concept is more candidly refined: ‘The nub of the state capture argument is that Mr. Zuma and his friends are putting state-owned enterprises and other governmental institutions in the hands of people who are allowing them to loot public funds.”
Indeed. Corruption invariably flows from state to society.

This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on Dec 31, 2017.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*