By Matlala Setlhalogile
As the American baseball player Yogi Berra famously observed, “the future ain’t what it used to be”. The sentiment aptly captures the evolution of South Africa’s political landscape since the advent of democracy in 1994. During the country’s early democratic period, voter behaviour was widely interpreted through the prism of identity politics, with elections often construed as racial censuses rather than contests over policy or performance.
In recent electoral cycles, however, this landscape has undergone a significant transformation as growing numbers of voters have become more willing to evaluate political parties on their ability to deliver effective governance, public services, and developmental outcomes. This shift has mostly been due to the evolving political culture. The evolution of the political culture has been a result of a myriad of factors.
Among the key aspects that were altered in the political culture is the comprehension of democracy in its totality – including the centrality of social justice and the concomitant positive liberties. There seems to be an emergent realisation that democracy is much more than its formal and procedural aspects. A democracy in which many lack access to resources and is void of the necessary socio-economic conditions that enable citizens to meaningfully exercise their rights is but a thin democracy. This thin democracy remains a reality for many South Africans, with pervasive poverty, high unemployment, and deep inequality undermining the substantive benefits of democratic citizenship. Beyond these overarching challenges, most of South Africa’s municipalities are characterised by endemic misgovernance and chronic service delivery failures. In practical terms, such conditions erode substantive freedom by restricting access to the services and opportunities necessary for individuals to lead dignified and fulfilling lives.
This reality is at odds with the ideas of democratic and developmental theorists such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Stuart Mill, and Amartya Sen. Although their perspectives are nuanced and distinct, they converge on the proposition that democracy should be more than a mechanism for selecting governments; it should serve as a vehicle for human development and individual self-actualisation. In this regard, the expansion of freedoms and capabilities is intrinsic to empowering citizens and enabling them to lead lives of dignity, opportunity, and fulfilment. The understanding of democracy among many South Africans has consequently evolved to reflect this perspective.
For many citizens, the value of democracy is judged less by its procedural attributes than by its substantive outcomes, particularly its capacity to improve material conditions and expand the freedoms and capabilities necessary for human development. Having formal rights and freedoms in a democracy is one thing; possessing the capabilities necessary to meaningfully exercise and benefit from them is quite another.
This understanding is reflected in a growing preference for a performance-based democratic culture, in which democracy is valued not merely for its procedures but for its capacity to deliver tangible developmental outcomes. Consequently, support for democracy among South Africans is increasingly linked to the performance of government, reflecting a strong belief that democratic institutions should improve material conditions, expand opportunities, and enhance citizens’quality of life.
This helps to explain why Nasiphi Moya’s mayoralty has been viewed positively by many residents and observers.
In a context where chronic service delivery failures and maladministration have become endemic across many South African municipalities, her leadership of the City of Tshwane has brought a measure of administrative stability and a renewed focus on governance outcomes. Central to this agenda have been efforts to restore financial sustainability, maintain and expand infrastructure, and revitalise economic activity. These interventions are significant not merely because they improve municipal performance, but because they strengthen institutional capacity and create the conditions necessary for investment, economic growth, job creation, and the expansion of substantive freedoms.
Moya’s record also benefits from the political legacy established during Herman Mashaba’stenure as mayor of the City of Johannesburg. While evaluations of Mashaba’s time in office remain contested, there is a broad perception that his administration compared favourably with those that followed. Consequently, Mashaba’s legacy, coupled with Moya’s performance in Tshwane, has strengthened Action SA’s claim to be a party capable of delivering tangible governance outcomes rather than merely participating in electoral competition.
This perception of Action SA intersects with a fundamental shift in South Africa’s political landscape, where public trust in established political parties and institutions has steadily declined. This erosion of trust has fuelled unprecedented political fragmentation and intensified electoral competition. While some emerging political formations have largely become alternative homes for disaffected supporters of established parties, others have sought to position themselves as genuine alternatives capable of breaking with entrenched political practices.
By emphasising governance performance, service delivery, and developmental outcomes, these parties have attempted to appeal to voters who are increasingly less concerned with historical loyalties and more concerned with tangible results. With some parties adopting a forward-looking orientation, the prevailing political fragmentation has the potential to evolve into a form of constructive hyper-pluralism that strengthens electoral competition and democratic accountability.
This would represent a departure from the all-too-common pattern of political instability and service delivery decline that has characterised many municipalities, particularly at the local government level. Despite operating within an often fragmented and volatile political environment, parties that prioritise governance performance have demonstrated that it is possible to promote administrative stability, uphold good governance, and improve service delivery outcomes. These developments are unfolding against the backdrop of growing voter fluidity in South Africa, characterised by an increasing willingness among citizens either to abstain from voting or to alter their party preferences across electoral cycles. Significantly, this fluidity extends beyond competition within a particular election type. It is also evident between local government and national elections, where voters frequently differentiate between parties based on governance performance, service delivery, leadership, and the specific responsibilities associated with each sphere of government.
Such behaviour reflects a weakening of traditional partisan loyalties and a greater willingness among citizens to reward or punish parties on the basis of their perceived governing performance. This voter fluidity also appears to have benefited Action SA during the 2021 Local Government Elections. Despite contesting only six municipalities, the party emerged as the sixth-largest party nationally, securing 90 council seats and demonstrating a remarkable ability to attract support beyond its limited electoral footprint. That performance was particularly noteworthy given that the party won only one ward seat, with most of its representation derived from proportional representation votes.
However, the momentum generated in 2021 did not translate into the stronger breakthrough many anticipated in the 2024 general elections. This suggests that while voters were willing to embrace Action SA as a local governance alternative, translating that support into a nationwide electoral coalition proved considerably more challenging. Although the final results of the 2026 Local Government Elections have yet to be formally confirmed, Action SA appears poised to improve on its 2021 performance.
Whereas the party won only a single ward seat in 2021 despite emerging as the sixth-largest party nationally, its expanded electoral footprint and heightened competitiveness suggest that it is likely to secure multiple ward victories, particularly in Gauteng’s metropolitan municipalities.
If realised, such an outcome would point to a maturing support base and an enhanced ability to translate electoral support into direct local representation. While Action SA is unlikely to become the most electorally dominant party nationally, the emerging results suggest that it is well placed to benefit from an evolving political culture that increasingly rewards effective governance and developmental performance.
The party’s prospects are further enhanced by high levels of voter fluidity, which have weakened traditional partisan loyalties and created greater opportunities for electoral realignment. Collectively, these developments reflect a gradual shift towards performance-based democratic accountability, where citizens increasingly evaluate political parties on their governing record rather than historical allegiance or identity-based considerations.
Matlala Setlhalogile lectures in Public Policy at the Wits School of Governance. He is also a researcher, a consultant, and a political analyst. He writes in his personal capacity.