Understand South Africa’s Oligarchy

Featured image is of SA oligarch Nicky Oppenheimer

South Africa is dominated by an oligarchy. It is one of the most concentrated oligarchies in the world, and while the term is usually associated with Russia, it has an objective meaning which it has held since Aristotle – “rule by a few”. When applied in comparison, this definition makes Russia less of an oligarchy than South Africa, and more of a “monarchy” (in the sense that it is “rule by one”).

All oligarchic regimes today, even dictatorial ones, have some form of democratic constitution, and varying degrees of party-political government, so “democracy” is hardly in contradiction with the other forms, at least in terms of nominal institutions. But the negotiation for control of resources and population inevitably involves the biggest players in the economy, and some players have more leverage than others.

But these figures should not be seen as the “bosses” of the economy directly – they must still negotiate for power among one another, and against the state and ruling party, which have their own interests, and considerable leverage. This leads to a number of compromises – some wicked, some beneficial. It is tough to take a cold-blooded look at these figures, because to us ordinary civilians, the scale of their power and influence is dizzying, and often disorienting. This scares people, and makes this area of study somewhat inducive of hysteria in the layman.

It helps to see this class as including other players. Besides the state and the oligarchs, there are also what I will call “institutional” oligarchic players – those who are forced to operate as agents of somewhat impersonal corporate structures (banking, the Chamber of Mines, AgriSA, SEIFSA, the press club, big insurance, retail). South Africa’s economy is highly concentrated, and even if singular private interests don’t decide everything, a very narrow slice of society make the decisions. The key decision makers could easily fit into one room, whether they constitute, owners, managers, officials or representatives.

But in practice, they are in tension – nobody likes being subordinate, and so state and private sector actors are almost always competing for control. This is never truer than in the case of countries with a history of popular communist movements, such as southern Africa and South America. The threat of nationalisation always remains, and so the political economy becomes a bone of contention.

The patronage of either the state or the economic elite in any country is vital for the completion of large-scale projects and investments, and so they are not going away. But overconcentration can result on market distortions and barriers to entry on the lower rungs of the economy, or even to pernicious feedback loops which gradually liquidate communities, wealth and talent pools. These are, at the end of the day, people… Explore the full article in PRISM #2 (March 2026)