The persistence of the debate about whether the African National Congress (ANC) can or should be characterized as a 'dominant party' was illustrated by exchanges between the country's leading political parties during the 2004 general election. The ANC, which views its hegemony as expressing its popularity, rejects its depiction as a 'dominant party' as inherently hostile, conservative and racist. In contrast, the Democratic Alliance (DA) and its associated analysts warn against dangers posed to democracy by the ANC's arrogance,
freedom from accountability, and its ambitions to extend increasing control over the state and society. After a review of the central tenets of the debate, the present article suggests that both sets of antagonists exaggerate their case. In contrast, whilst accepting that the ANC's electoral and political hegemony does carry threats to democracy, it also proposes that the ability of the ANC to extend its dominance is subject to considerable limitations. This argument is pursued through analysis of such factors as the multidimensionality of party dominance, the extent to which the ANC's attempted centralization of power is constrained by constitutional, political and economic realities, the perpetuation of debate within the ANC and between itself and its principal allied organizations, and finally the difficulties faced by the ANC in imposing its authority upon a society as complex as that of South Africa. The conclusion argues that the dominant party thesis, whilst too often exaggerated, is too important and insightful to be abandoned, and that careful analysis suggests that the basis of ANC dominance is far from static, and is likely to be subjected to considerable challenge over coming years.