Demystifying the messianic posture of the ANC: electoral legitimation and the politics of liberation memory in post-apartheid South Africa

Introduction

Notwithstanding its limited success in materially improving the lives of the majority of historically marginalised Black South Africans, the African National Congress (ANC) has demonstrated a remarkable capability to retain political power and relevance in the post-apartheid era. Since 1994, the party has secured electoral victories in seven consecutive national elections, although the most recent resulted in its governance being sustained through a coalition arrangement. How has the ANC retained electoral legitimacy in the face of mounting governance failures? Under an ideal democratic condition, one would reasonably expect otherwise amid persistent failures to address the pressing challenges confronting marginalised communities, particularly in the context of declining service delivery, recurrent corruption scandals, and prolonged economic stagnation, to translate into a significant erosion of electoral support. Yet, this anticipated political consequence has not fully materialised. Instead, the ANC’s enduring electoral dominance has attracted substantial scholarly attention.

Existing literature has sought to explain this phenomenon through multiple analytical lenses, including dominant-party systems (Adetiba, 2018; Brooks, 2004), electoral outcomes and party dominance (Hlungwani and Tyali, 2024; Giliomee and Simkins, 1999), and patterns of voter behaviour and political loyalty (Paret and Runciman, 2023; Braun, 2024). While these studies offer valuable insights into the structural and behavioural dimensions of ANC support, they leave room for further interrogation of the symbolic and ideological mechanisms through which such electoral resilience has been sustained. Other studies have linked corruption scandals, poor governance performance, and poor public service to the gradual decline of both voter turnout and electoral dominance. These factors have raised concerns about the sustainability of the ANC’s dominance in future elections and the need for the party to address these issues to maintain its support base.

Bragança and Wallerstein’s (1982) offers an extensive analysis of the anatomy of colonialism and neo-colonialism, detailing how organizations such as the Movimento Popular de Libertação de Angola (MPLA) emerged as pivotal liberation movements. Sapire and Saunders (2013) stated that the histories of liberation movements and international solidarity can be read in a single frame, since it was in the situation of exile that they interacted with, and influenced, one another. As these movements returned back and transitioned into ruling parties within their respective states, a critical need arose to evaluate their effectiveness in governance and their ability to sustain political power. This paper presents a South African case study that contributes to the broader continental pattern identified by Twala and Hove (2026), who argues that liberation movements across Africa utilise their historical legacies as active instruments for maintaining political control. By situating the ANC’s messianic posture within this broader liberation context, the paper demonstrates how the party’s liberation credentials are not only invoked as historical memory but are continuously mobilised to legitimise its political dominance, reinforce a sense of entitlement to govern, and marginalise alternative liberation narratives.

Existing scholarship attributes the ANC’s electoral resilience to dominant-party institutional advantages, liberation legitimacy, clientelist networks, weak opposition, racial voting patterns, and welfare policies such as social grants. While these explanations remain persuasive, they do not fully explain the moral language through which ANC leaders continue to justify their political authority. The concept of a messianic posture complements rather than replaces these explanations by demonstrating how liberation memory functions as an active political resource. This paper is structured as follows: The paper begins by outlining the conceptual and theoretical framework of messianic posture and electoral mobilisation, before examining the historical construction of the ANC’s messianic narrative. It then analyses the political, military, financial, and diplomatic support that sustained the liberation struggle, followed by a discussion of other actors in the liberation movement. The paper explores liberation history as moral capital and assesses the ANC’s liberation legacy and democratic contribution, before examining the unravelling of its messianic posture. It further investigates the shift from liberation legacy to electoral expediency and the contemporary manifestations of this contradiction, concluding with reflections on the implications of these developments for political legitimacy and electoral politics in South Africa.

Conceptual framework: messianic posture and electoral mobilisation

Existing scholarship has explained the ANC’s electoral resilience through dominant-party theory (Brooks, 2004), liberation legitimacy (Southall, 2013), voter loyalty (Braun, 2024), and historical memory. While these perspectives explain why liberation movements continue to enjoy electoral support after democratisation, they pay less attention to how liberation movements actively construct themselves as indispensable political actors whose authority transcends democratic accountability. This paper addresses this conceptual gap through the notion of a “messianic posture. The concept of messianic posture refers to a discursive and political strategy through which liberation movements claims enduring legitimacy and authority based on its historic mission, presents itself as the nation’s saviour, mobilises support through memories of past liberation struggles, and institutionalises a sense of political superiority over its counterparts. Unlike liberation legitimacy, which recognises historical credibility derived from participation in the liberation struggle, a messianic posture extends this legitimacy into a normative claim that continued political authority is both morally justified and historically necessary irrespective of contemporary governance performance.

Table 1.

Source: Author compilation.

In this regard, the ANC distinguishes itself as endowed with a unique moral mandate derived from its role in bringing about democracy in South Africa. Such a posture elevates liberation credentials into a claim of enduring political entitlement, framing continued rule as both a reward for past sacrifice and as necessary for safeguarding the gains of freedom (Southall, 2013). In this sense, political loyalty is transformed from a rational, performance-based choice into a moral obligation grounded in collective memory and historical gratitude.

Within post-liberation societies, this messianic self-representation often becomes a powerful electoral resource. Comparable dynamics are evident across Southern Africa. In Zimbabwe, ZANU-PF has consistently mobilised liberation history and anti-colonial symbolism to legitimise its continued rule and to cast political opposition as counter-revolutionary, thereby converting struggle credentials into enduring electoral and institutional authority (Southall, 2013; Tsholo, 2021). In Namibia, SWAPO’s political dominance has similarly been anchored in its custodianship of the independence struggle, with liberation memory functioning as a central source of voter loyalty and moral legitimacy (Melber, 2015; Miškářík, 2019; Twala and Hove, 2026). In Angola, the MPLA has drawn on its foundational role in the anti-colonial and civil war struggles to construct a moral claim to govern, embedding liberation legitimacy within state institutions and electoral politics to consolidate long-term political dominance (Pitcher, 2014; Vidal and Andrade, 2008).

South African history can be divided into two key periods: Emerging African Nationalism and Working-Class and Popular Resistance (1900–1950s), and The Armed Struggle and Popular Resistance (1960–1994) (South African History Online, 2025). This paper focuses on the latter, as it delves into the era of liberation movements in Southern Africa. During this defined period, the ANC and other liberation movements played a significant role in what was a collective struggle, while simultaneously getting recognition for their efforts on an international scale. Post 1994, The ANC portrayed itself as the sole custodian of liberation and democracy, a narrative that has cultivated deep emotional attachment and electoral deference among large segments of the electorate, even in the context of declining governance performance and institutional crises (Brooks, 2004; Giliomee and Simkins, 1999; Everatt, 2020).

Methodology

This article adopts a qualitative conceptual research design. It develops the concept of the ANC’s “messianic posture” through critical engagement with existing scholarship on liberation movements, dominant-party politics and political legitimacy. The paper draws on a range of documentary and scholarly sources, including ANC policy documents, speeches and public statements by senior party leaders, peer-reviewed journal articles, academic books, and book chapters. The objective is not to establish causal relationships but to refine a conceptual framework capable of explaining how liberation history is transformed into contemporary political legitimacy. The analysis is guided by the concept of messianic posture, which provides the analytical lens through which the selected documentary material is examined. Through these, particular attention is given to narratives that construct the ANC as the custodian of liberation, defender of democratic gains, or principal agent of the unfinished transformation project, as well as discourses that distinguish the ANC from or delegitimise political alternatives.

Historical construction of the ANC’S messianic narrative

It is indeed true that the ANC is the oldest liberation movement and Black political party in South Africa, and as such, it enjoyed a comparative advantage over political formations and liberation movements such as the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), South African Communist Party (SACP) that later joined the struggle against apartheid. The ANC had a relatively superior footprint in coordinating anti-apartheid activities and mobilizing support both domestically and internationally, which contributed to its status as a leading force in the fight for liberation.

Formed in 1912 as the South African Native National Congress (SANNC) and later renamed the African National Congress (ANC) in 1923, the ANC is the oldest anti-colonial movement in South Africa and in Southern Africa. In 1944, the ANC underwent a significant ideological and strategic shift from a petition-oriented elitism to a more radical approach, culminating in an action programme that embraced organised mass militancy and activism against the apartheid regime (Lodge, 1983; Mandela, 1994; Suttner, 2004). On 11 July 1963, the capture and arrest of ANC, PAC, SACP, and SAIC leaders, including Nelson Mandela, Ahmed Kathrada, and Walter Sisulu inter alia, led to the Rivonia Trial, which resulted in life imprisonment for many of the accused. After the Second World War, this much-needed ideological shift by the ANC, which led to the founding of Umkhonto we Sizwe, marked a new era of liberation movements in South Africa.

The ANC subsequently played a crucial role in leading the liberation struggle in South Africa, across the Southern African region, and globally. Owing to the intensified hostility and pursuit by the apartheid police, many of the ANC and PAC members were forced to operate in exile (Mamabolo, 2025), thereby internationalising the struggle and strengthening regional and global solidarity networks. Following its banning in 1961, the PAC established its armed wing, Poqo, later renamed the Azanian People’s Liberation Army (APLA), to pursue armed struggle against the apartheid government.

During its years in exile, the ANC can be linked to London and non-governmental organisations in the US, USSR and other European capitals who supported solidarity politics promoted and funded the work of the ANC. Mamabolo (2025), in his book titled, based on his analysis at the time, narrates the manner in which the ANC had, above other organisations, established, and cooperated with in South Africa, Africa and the world. He adds that this assessment led to him and other at the time, joining the ANC in exile when he was faced with imminent arrest against his participation in a protest. During this period, the role played by the ANC included the establishment of the Special comm on Apartheid. It is responsible for producing one of the most important documents in the history of South Africa, with documents such as the African Claims of 1943, the Freedom Charter of 1956 (the only document with massive participation), and the 1988 Constitutional Guidelines for a Democratic South Africa. In the context of post-1994 South Africa, these documents serve as a foundation for current governance and social development in the country.

Political, military support financial, and diplomatic support

The ANC played a central coordinating role in cultivating a sophisticated network of political, diplomatic, and military solidarity. Operating in exile, the ANC leveraged host states as strategic bases for mobilisation, training, and international advocacy, thereby embedding its struggle within a broader regional liberation framework (Ellis, 2013; South African History Online, n.d.-a,b; Houston, 2008). The relations between the ANC and the Frontline States (Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe) underscore the organisation’s extensive regional reach and attest to its political credibility, legitimacy, and influence within Southern Africa. Collectively, the Frontline States, and the ANC, played a significant role in dismantling white minority rule in Southern Africa, contributing to the independence of Zimbabwe and Namibia and the eventual collapse of apartheid in South Africa through coordinated regional solidarity, military support, and diplomatic pressure (Sapire and Saunders (2013); Khadiagala, 1994). This long history allowed for a comparative advantage with the development of strong networks and alliances that further bolstered its position within the anti-apartheid movement. This network later be used by the ANC to not only collaborate with other liberation movements from the country such as the PAC and SACP, but to forge strategic relations with.

Also, Mamabolo (2025) narrates The ANC participation in earlier debates that took centre stage in global forums and benefited from external exposure which in turn bolstered its position as the primary, if not the main leader of the liberation movement in the country. These debates included discussions on sanctions, arms embargoes, and diplomatic isolation of the apartheid regime. Suffice to say the ANC’s had a solid foundation in international relations and diplomacy, which contributed to its success in gaining support and recognition not only in the country but on a global scale, hence its claim to legitimacy as the true representative of the South African people.

According to Smith (2020), and Mamabolo (2025), the period of exile (1960–1990) marks a period where the ANC developed a sophisticated media infrastructure to maintain its political presence and mobilise resistance within South Africa and beyond. This network included clandestine radio stations such as Radio Freedom, which was formally established as the “voice of the ANC” in 1963, initially operating from Liliesleaf Farm before being forced to broadcast from African host countries such as Zambia, Tanzania, and Ethiopia (Smith, 2020). Other avenues included publications such as Sechaba magazine, the distribution of pamphlets and newsletters, as well as participation in international press coverage and solidarity movements to raise awareness of the anti-apartheid struggle. Smith (2020) and Thomas and Selekane (2026) examine the influence of radio on political opinion in Southern Africa, showing how the ANC strategically utilised it to maintain a constant presence, shape political ideologies, and mobilise resistance (Lekgoathi et al., 2020), an approach that contributed to its enduring popular loyalty in the post-apartheid period.

While the PAC established its own exile press, notably Azania News, to disseminate its ideology to supporters both within South Africa and abroad, the ANC significantly eclipsed the PAC in terms of reach and popularity. This disparity in influence became more pronounced over time, as the PAC, despite remaining active into the 1990s, was increasingly weakened by internal divisions and leadership struggles, contributing to its decline in relevance and influence relative to the ANC (Kondlo, 2008).

Delegitimising opposition

In the same way that the ANC cannot be divorced when discussing South Africa’s fight for liberation, the PAC must also be acknowledged in any discussion on the subject. However, their roles and contributions remain overshadowed by the dominant narrative of the ANC. Discussions on Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe’s legacy, and the role of the PAC have highlighted how the PAC’s contributions to the liberation struggle, along with Sobukwe’s intellectual, political, and philosophical impact, have been “pushed to the periphery” in post-apartheid South Africa (University of South Africa, 2018). This discussion was undertaken as part of an academic commemorative engagement hosted by the University of South Africa (UNISA). As a reflective and intellectual forum, the event brought together scholars and practitioners to interrogate the legacy of Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe and the broader silencing of the PAC within South Africa’s liberation historiography (University of South Africa, 2018).

The SACP was the first political movement in South Africa officially to practise non-racialism. It restructured itself as an underground movement in enormously difficult circumstances after being banned in 1950. It inspired numerous brave and dedicated individuals who devoted their lives to the anti-apartheid struggle. It kept alive the notion of working-class struggle in the liberation movement, and it played a key role in the armed struggle and the mobilisation of the international campaign against apartheid (South African Labour Bulletin, 2008, p.39).

Fundamentally, the foregoing suggests a deliberate systematic silencing of the contribution of Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe and the PAC to the both the ANC and South African political discourse in general. The PAC leader, Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe redefined the PAC through his Pan-Africanist ideology, foregrounding African self-determination and a distinctly African-centred approach to liberation (Pogrund, 1990; Kondlo, 2008). Under his leadership, the PAC mobilised mass resistance, most notably through the anti-pass campaigns culminating in Sharpeville, which marked a decisive moment in confronting apartheid authority. Looking back, this event was somewhat successful because it got people talking about the South African issue, which led to more scrutiny, diplomatic pressure, and stronger international solidarity movements against apartheid.

On March 21, 1960, the PAC initiated a peaceful nationwide anti-pass campaign that culminated in the tragic Sharpeville Massacre and the organisation’s subsequent banning in South Africa. In response, the PAC established its armed wing in 1961, originally known as Poqo and later renamed the Azanian People’s Liberation Army (APLA), to wage an armed struggle against the apartheid regime (Lekgoathi et al., 2020; South African History Online, n.d.-a,b). Regrettably, owing to its radical posture, the PAC was banned shortly after its founding (Lekgoathi et al., 2020), a development that forced the organisation into premature exile and consequently disrupted its internal consolidation and their overall political trajectory. While in exile, the ideological foundations of Sobukwe continued to inform PAC activities, including publications such as Azania News and the training of cadres along Africanist lines (Kondlo, 2008; South African History Online, n.d.-a,b). Nevertheless, PAC’s contributions did not translate into comparable organisational reach, as the ANC secured broader international support and visibility. Although the SACP, in other isolated instances acted independently in how it contributed to the political discourse in general. The SACP, the ANC, and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) subsequently formed the Tripartite Alliance on 11 February 1990. Owing to this amalgamation, the claim that the ANC has silenced other liberation movements cannot be applied in the same way to organisations within the alliance. While the PAC never entered into such an arrangement, the SACP has, despite tensions and periods of strain, maintained a working relationship with the ANC within the Tripartite Alliance in post-1994 South Africa.

Liberation memory

The use of liberation history as a moral capital, and the sense of entitlement among former liberation movements now in government is not a new phenomenon. Rather, it has been identified and analysed across countries such as South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Namibia (Southall, 2013). This comparative perspective provides an important foundation for the present paper, which examines the ANC’s “messianic posture” and its use of liberation history as an electoral strategy. Also, this paper builds on the insights of Twala and Hove (2026), who analyse a broader continental pattern in which liberation movements mobilise their historical legitimacy to sustain political dominance. Rather than being unique to the ANC, this practice emerges as a broader regional pattern. Twala and Hove (2026) demonstrates that, despite differing national contexts, liberation movements display strikingly similar tendencies, rooted in the belief that their role in achieving liberation confers a continuing right to govern.

It is within this broader continental logic that the ANC’s conduct can be understood. The party’s invocation of its liberation credentials reflects not only a South African reality but also a wider pattern in which historical legitimacy is mobilised to justify prolonged rule, an argument that speaks directly to the paper’s conceptualisation of the ANC’s “messianic posture.” Importantly, when analysing liberation movements, their roles must be situated within the broader network of liberation movements and the period of their struggle. While the ANC played a significant role in dismantling apartheid in South Africa, its success was deeply interconnected with, and often coordinated alongside, other movements both within the country and across the region. The SACP, in particular, played a critical and often complementary role and can, in many respects, be placed alongside the ANC in understanding the broader dynamics of the struggle (Robinson, 2013).

The ANC’S liberation legacy and democratic contribution

It would be shallow to dismiss the ANC’s good story, which occupies a significant place in South Africa’s history and its contribution toward the advancement of democratic values post-1994. In light of the abundance of evidence supporting the ANC’s liberation credentials and enduring liberation legacy (Lodge, 1983; Southall, 2013; Ngqulunga, 2023), the sacrifices made in ending apartheid and securing democratic rule (Mandela, 1994; Suttner, 2004; Twala & Hove, 2026), and its contribution to South Africa’s democratic development and continued electoral appeal (Giliomee and Simkins, 1999; Braun, 2024; Hlungwani and Tyali, 2024), the framing of the ANC’s messianic posture in this paper is not oblivious to the foregoing considerations but rather offers a critical assessment of the ANC, as the largest liberation movement in South Africa, with particular attention to its leadership rhetoric and governance impact in contemporary South Africa.

Moreso, other notable achievements include the expansion of electrification programmes, housing provision, social welfare grants, and improved access to water and sanitation. The ANC government has also advanced access to higher education through the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS), pursued universal healthcare through the National Health Insurance (NHI) initiative, invested in infrastructure development, and implemented various programmes aimed at promoting economic growth and job creation.

Unravelling of the messianic posture

Post-1994, the ANC positioned itself as both the primary custodian of the revolutionary project, and as watchdogs against the “destructionists of democracy”. The ANC’s messianic posture is further reflected in the discourse of senior party leaders, who frequently invoke the party’s liberation credentials as evidence of its unique responsibility to protect and advance the revolutionary project. The contemporary expressions of the ANC’s elite leaders further expose how the mobilisation of liberation history is not confined to liberation movements outside the country, but an active reality reproduced through contemporary political discourse in South Africa. Statements by senior party figures such as Fikile Mbalula and Ronald Lamola further exposes the ANC to a consistent pattern in which it has positioned itself as the sole custodian of the revolutionary project. Problematically, in cases where the ANC is challenged for its failures to fulfil its own promises, Fikile Mbalula has characterised such voices as “anti-revolutionary, (ANC, 2024) Similarly, Ronald Lamola’s public discourse frequently locates contemporary governance and transformation within the broader historical mission of the liberation struggle. Furthermore, his characterisation of certain political attacks and actions as “counter-revolutionary” (Lamola, 2022; Daily Updates ZA, 2026), reflects a tendency to interpret contemporary political contestation through the language and symbolism of liberation politics.

A similar line of reasoning is also evident in the discourse of Gwede Mantashe, who has asserted that “we must defend the revolution and defend every attack on the ANC structures” and that “any advice from your enemy is not advice” (News24Wire, 2016). Mantashe’s speech demonstrates a pronounced messianic posture by framing the ANC as the embodiment of the South African revolution. Such assertions collapse the distinction between party and revolution, constructing a moral and political hierarchy in which the ANC is elevated as the legitimate inheritor of the struggle, while its opponents are cast as adversarial or counter-revolutionary. In doing so, these narratives narrow a broader and more interconnected history of liberation into a singular, party-centred account, reinforcing the politics of entitlement identified by Twala and Hove (2026) and aligning closely with the paper’s conceptualisation of a “messianic posture.”

The remarks by Fikile Mbalula, Ronald Lamola, and Gwede Mantashe collectively illuminate how the ANC’s “messianic posture” is not an abstract claim, but a lived and recurring feature of its contemporary political discourse. While each speaks from a different institutional position, party machinery, state governance, and ideological leadership, their statements converge around a shared logic that elevates the ANC as the central moral and historical authority in South African politics.

Mbalula’s framing of dissent as “anti-revolutionary” performs an important boundary-setting function. By defining critics in opposition to the revolution itself, he collapses the distinction between disagreement with the ANC and opposition to the liberation project. This move implicitly casts the ANC as the sole legitimate bearer of revolutionary continuity, thereby reinforcing the idea that political legitimacy flows from alignment with the party. In this sense, dissent is not normalised as part of democratic pluralism but is recast as deviation from a historically sanctioned path.

Lamola’s interventions operate at the level of governance but reproduce a similar logic. By grounding contemporary policy choices, such as the mixed economy and Black Economic Empowerment, in the historical mission of the liberation struggle, he embeds present-day governance within a longer moral narrative. This not only legitimises policy direction but also situates the ANC as the indispensable vehicle through which the objectives of liberation are realised. Consequently, policy disagreement is subtly reframed as a challenge to the foundational goals of the democratic project itself.

Mantashe’s rhetoric sharpens this posture further by explicitly collapsing the boundary between the ANC and the revolution. His assertion that the revolution must be defended alongside the ANC, and his characterisation of opponents as “enemies,” (News24Wire, 2016) constructs a binary moral universe in which the party embodies the revolution, while opposition is positioned as inherently adversarial. This formulation is particularly significant because it transforms the ANC from a political actor into a symbolic guardian of national liberation, thereby elevating its status beyond that of an ordinary party competing within a democratic system.

Taken together, these discursive patterns reveal that the “messianic posture” is sustained through three mutually reinforcing mechanisms: the delegitimisation of opposition (Mbalula), the historicisation of governance (Lamola), and the fusion of party and revolution (Mantashe). Through these processes, the ANC is not merely presented as a former liberation movement, but as the enduring custodian of South Africa’s moral and political trajectory. This convergence ultimately narrows the space for alternative political imaginaries, as legitimacy becomes tethered to liberation credentials rather than contemporary performance, thereby entrenching the very politics of entitlement that this paper seeks to interrogate.

From liberation legacy to electoral expediency

The discursive pattern articulated by Fikile Mbalula, Ronald Lamola, and Gwede Mantashe does not remain confined to rhetoric; it carries tangible implications for electoral behaviour. The construction of the ANC as the sole custodian of the liberation project feeds directly into how voters interpret political choice, often transforming elections from a contest over policy performance into a moral judgement about loyalty to the legacy of liberation. Mbalula’s framing of dissent as “anti-revolutionary” contributes to a political environment in which voting against the ANC can be perceived not merely as a preference for an alternative party, but as a departure from the ideals of the struggle. In this way, electoral behaviour becomes morally charged, particularly among constituencies with strong historical attachments to the liberation movement. Similarly, Lamola’s grounding of contemporary governance in the historical mission of liberation embeds policy debates within a broader narrative of unfinished struggle. This encourages voters to evaluate the ANC not only on present outcomes, but on its perceived role as the vehicle through which long-standing historical injustices are being addressed.

Mantashe’s more explicit conflation of the ANC with the revolution reinforces this dynamic at a deeper level. By framing the defence of the ANC as synonymous with the defence of the revolution itself, political support for the party is elevated into an act of historical continuity. This produces what may be understood as a form of identity-based voting, where allegiance to the ANC is sustained through emotional, historical, and symbolic ties rather than solely through rational evaluation of governance performance. Collectively, these narratives contribute to a voting culture in which liberation memory functions as political capital. The ANC’s “messianic posture” thus shapes electoral behaviour by narrowing the space for opposition legitimacy and by embedding voter loyalty within a moral framework tied to the past. As a result, even in the face of governance challenges, segments of the electorate may continue to support the ANC, not simply because of policy agreement, but because the party is perceived as the enduring embodiment of the liberation struggle. This dynamic helps explain the persistence of electoral support for the ANC in the democratic era, while also illuminating the structural difficulties faced by opposition parties in dislodging historically rooted political authority.

Contemporary manifestations of the contradiction

Albeit the ANC’s continued reliance on leveraging liberation history as a source of political legitimacy, It has woefully failed to remain as political “holly” as they have often found themselves faced with controversies that challenge the moral authority historically associated with the organisation. For instance, the Phala Phala matter, which have been topical subject in public discourse, as it raises questions about transparency, accountability, and ethical leadership at the highest level of government. Despite its messianic posture post-1994, controversies of this nature create unwanted contradictions between the ANC’s claims to liberation-era legitimacy and contemporary expectations of democratic governance. In the context of this paper, the significance of the Phala Phala matter lies less in the merits of the case itself and more in how such controversies affect the credibility of liberation-based authority.

Similarly, anti-illegal immigration marches and protests that have emerged across parts of South Africa reflect broader frustrations relating to unemployment, inequality, crime, and state capacity. These mobilisations reveal growing public dissatisfaction with socioeconomic conditions that persist three decades after liberation. Within the framework of the paper, such developments are significant because they demonstrate the limits of historical legitimacy as a political resource. This is not to say that liberation narratives have been defused from commanding a substantial degree of symbolic loyalty among sections of the electorate, worsening social and economic conditions increasingly shift public attention from reliance on liberation credentials and relevance, toward governance outcomes when it comes to their positionality on the worsening conditions in the country. From an electoral perspective, this development may present a challenge for both the ANC and the EFF, which have openly opposed anti-illegal immigration marches. Given the growing public concern over undocumented migration and its perceived impact on jobs, crime, and public services (Gordon, 2017: Chisadza, 2024; Magadze and Netshidzivhani, 2024), such positions have the potential to alienate some voters and further weaken the ANC’s electoral standing. The rise of political formations and civic movements centred on immigration issues further suggests that South Africans are now choosing to ignore the ANC and act outside the traditional liberation discourse that has long dominated South African politics.

The paper can also locate these developments within wider regional debates concerning allegations of private economic interests among political elites. Across several former liberation-movement governments in Southern Africa, scholars have highlighted concerns regarding the intersection of political power, business interests, patronage networks, and access to state resources (Southall, 2013; Melber, 2015). Such allegations are particularly problematic because liberation movements historically derived legitimacy from claims of collective sacrifice, public service, and popular representation. When political elites are perceived to benefit privately from state power, a contradiction emerges between liberation ideals and contemporary political malpractices.

Conclusion

This paper demonstrates how the ANC has drawn on its history as a liberation movement as an electoral strategy to retain political power, while marginalising other political actors in South Africa and elevating its position above what was once a collective struggle. The argument advanced in this paper is not that the ANC lacks historical legitimacy, but rather that this legitimacy is increasingly mobilised as a political resource in ways that elevate the organisation above other participants in the liberation struggle and shield it from contemporary scrutiny. The paper contributes to debates on how liberation history is used to sustain political legitimacy and electoral dominance in postcolonial Africa. Yet this prolonged incumbency reveals an unfavourable paradox. While liberation credentials are invoked to justify continued rule, the ANC increasingly acts as a gatekeeper of the political order, often preserving the status quo rather than advancing meaningful transformation. Noteworthy, this messianic posture becomes difficult to sustain, as it legitimises authority while masking declining effectiveness, and ultimately calls into question the durability of liberation-based legitimacy in contemporary South Africa.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

Edited by: Muhluri Nkuna, University of Limpopo, South Africa

Reviewed by: Mahmoud Patel, University of the Western Cape, South Africa

Baldwin Hove, Central University of Technology, South Africa