THE SMART NEWS SOURCE | Feb 10 2010 03:03 | LAST UPDATED Feb 10 2010 03:03

ADVERTISE WITH US | CONTACT US | STORY TIP-OFFS | M&G NEWSLETTER

Special Reports

Of pretence and protest

NJABULO S NDEBELE - Sep 23 2009 18:16

27 comments | Post your comment

At the end of his recent Mail & Guardian article, "In the rainbow nation, colour and class still count", David Smith recalls "a cynic whispering" in his ear that's not easy to forget: "The whites are pretending it didn't happen; the blacks are pretending to forgive." As I thought further about this, I concluded that, in the light of the interracial events Smith recalls in his article, there may in fact be a positive value to pretence.

Pretence could be a coping mechanism in which one owns up to the fact that one is unable to respond confidently and appropriately to human relations conundrums of the kind that race, gender and class tensions can throw up from time to time. Resorting to pretence may not necessarily be an indication of hypocrisy, but rather a desire to buy time or a muted cry for help.

The situation that leads to pretence may work somewhat this way: if you are a white South African, you may realise the many times you recognised and acknowledged that you were complicit, willingly or by default, in social, economic and political practices in the past that resulted in the extreme pain and suffering of others. You further recognised that although that past was unsustainable, you have not entirely shaken off the hold that its emotional and material benefits once had on you. This is a most distressing realisation. How then do you translate your distress into corrective behaviour?

Until and unless you find answers to this question, you enter and live in the world of pretence. There, you make no choices; you amble along from one ethical challenge to the next, doing your best. You may discover in yourself a tendency to be harsh on fellow whites and to understand blacks and their demands, until you realise that such behaviour choices are untenable, if not demeaning. Many whites may, in fact, be in a situation similar to yours. Your harshness towards them could be a form of self-flagellation; while blacks, on the other hand, simply hate to be "understood". You are then locked in a space of anguish.

If you are black, the world around you confirms your historical anguish. Much as you may try, you are unable to forget that your anger and sometimes hatred gave justification and legitimacy to acts of resistance against the unjust system of apartheid in the past. The moral imperative of your vision for equality, nonracialism and others enshrined in the Constitution has enjoined you to look ahead to new and positive relationships with your fellow white citizens.

However, your wish for such a world is constantly undermined by the persistence of the landscape of inequality and by recidivist acts of racism that enrage you. You experience your ethical resolve being eroded, a condition you feel driving you towards lowest-common-denominator responses that are easy to make but never fulfilling.

You find yourself then being constantly pushed back to the alluring hatreds of the past and their call for activism. But then you pause: is it the whites who are responsible for my anguish or is it a black government that is not providing the requisite leadership and delivering the heaven it promised? Protest against a black government could be a form of betrayal. Protest against whites may be safer, but could really be no more than posturing when you discover that in lashing out against perceived white racism, all you are doing is replaying what you were good at in the past: "discovering and unmasking acts of racism" and then assailing them.

While in the past this may have been seen as a progressive onslaught against the legitimacy of apartheid, today it can be read as the failure of the new leadership, predominantly black, to provide an alternative model of multiracial and multicultural relationships in South Africa. The total effect is to replay acts of indictment with often predictable conclusions, which offer only fleeting satisfaction. Meanwhile, the resilient landscape of inequality continues to wreak havoc on your capacity to hope for a different future, until the next anti-racism protest. So you move along in an unresolved situation, hoping for the best: locked in a space of anguish.

It is not improbable that a great number of South Africans are locked in this space of anguish, leading us to a critical question: on what basis can we achieve a new social cohesion that enables us to find the most enabling human environment that can accord us, as South Africans, a sustainable human capacity to solve our toughest problems in the social domain and in a far less harsh and more permissive political environment?

CONTINUES BELOW

First, the existence of such a collective space of anguish may have to be recognised and acknowledged as the one feature in our public and private lives that has the potential to bind us. Beyond that it is vital to recognise that, being in that space, South Africans may not hold the same quantum of responsibility and accountability. If you are black at this historic conjuncture you hold the greater share of responsibility, because we told ourselves that we were at the helm of one of the 20th century's most inspiring human transformations; that, in the spirit Paulo Freire captured in his unforgettable Pedagogy of the Oppressed, we had the mission not only to free ourselves from oppression, but also to free the oppressor. We deeply believed in this. What, at this point, is our assessment of how we have carried out this task and responsibility?

It seems as if instead of setting out to create a new reality, we worked merely to inherit an old one. Perhaps in retrospect some of the elements of the negotiated settlement that led to the historic elections of 1994 served to subvert the higher order mission. Redistribution was given priority over creation and invention. That way we reaffirmed the structures of inequality by seeking to work within their inherent logic. Perhaps it was in this way that the promise of the human revolution once dreamed of was conceptually subverted.

While the new political elites were incorporated into the structures of corporate reward and incentive cultures, millions of other South Africans were demobilised by social grants and truth commission reparations, some aspects of which are difficult not to see as material rewards for surviving the horrors of apartheid. This may have engendered an unintended expectation that the world will yield its rewards to me without an attendant obligation on my part to be engaged in changing my relationship with the world under the steam of my own leadership.

From time to time I will make demands on that world and this may include calling on white people to change without a concomitant obligation on my part to do the same. I may say from time to time that whites are ungrateful. They still have everything, yet they continue to disrespect me. When I say so, I may forget that I was part of the agreement that led to the current state of affairs in which I am intimately implicated and that the future may require other kinds of agreements for which I am obliged to provide leadership.

Failure to exercise leadership is dangerous. It may even take away your right to "good sense". This happens when the way you react to events and "good sense" is articulated by others who you now feel compelled to oppose to reassert your leadership, losing it further in the process. The Zimbabwean situation illustrates this danger. The Southern African Development Community's positions on Zimbabwe should in reality be recognised as a failure of SADC governments to take leadership and responsibility for their sub-continent. This happens each time they racialise the Zimbabwean situation as a contest between the white north and the black south.

The white north tends to come across as holding the moral high ground on Zimbabwe. This comes from its unambiguous statements about the sufferings of the people of Zimbabwe and the direct responsibility that Robert Mugabe bears for this situation. The black south never articulates a clear position.

Instead, murky statements are made that add up to inarticulate solidarities. The black south is unable to articulate "good sense" because it has allowed "good sense" to be appropriated by "the West". The promise of northern financial assistance obscures the situation further. The white north is thus in a position to be resented at the same time as it is needed. It is in this way that the black south, in failing to exercise responsibility and provide leadership, has given away "good sense" on a silver platter to a perceived enemy who is nevertheless needed.

Jean-Paul Sartre captures our condition of anguish so well in his short reflective piece, The Republic of Silence. "Never were we freer than under the German Occupation." According to Sartre, the French during the occupation existed outside the domain of German law, which they refused to recognise. Paradoxically, this gave the French an invigorated sense of freedom. "Because," writes Sartre, "the Nazi venom seeped into our very thoughts, every accurate thought was a triumph. Because an all-powerful police force tried to gag us, every word became precious as a declaration of principle. Because we were wanted, men and women, every one of our acts was a solemn commitment."

For us now in South Africa, 15 years into our freedom, the sacred space of what I should now call "resuscitative lawlessness" has been ironically handed over to the proverbial "white racist", who is then deemed to display contempt for black people by saying the things black people ought to say but choose not to say because their "precious declarations of principle" have been replaced by the uncritical solidarities of the day. Equally so, black people have given up the space to "triumph" with a rigorous "accuracy of thought". The "solemn commitment" that their actions used to signify has been reduced to the whimper of anti-racist protest. To lead and create a world, or to protest endlessly, that is the question!

To choose to lead, there is no doubt in my mind, bears the greater responsibility and is the higher-order challenge of history. It is to choose to place the shared anguish of coping through pretence within the realm of responsibility and to use it as a basis for a sensitive attempt to create ever-expanding circles of social solidarity across the great barriers of race, ethnicity, gender and class without fudging their impact. It is to choose to commit to finding an appropriate political instrument that will set a foundation of trust for South Africans to recover their shared idealism.

This demands that we reconnect with the founding compromises of the negotiated settlement that led to 1994. When we did so we chose the path of the rigorous "application of thought" by which we would embrace the complexities and ambiguities of managing a modern state. We entered a terrain of no easy answers, which nevertheless demands answers. In this we have to develop the disposition as a national trait to make complex connections. I mention only a few which strike me because their resonant connections with the theme of race defy simplification.

For a start, the whirlwind of capital accumulation is still blowing. It is a sign of the times and has the real capacity to undermine the ethical will of government and the body politic. It can be read as a historically unavoidable redistribution of capital and assets to an ascendant power. That being the case, this process can be read in two ways. It can be read only as a movement of wealth from whites to blacks, in which blacks structurally join whites within the inherited social and economic structures of whiteness and all its rules and regulations governing rewards and incentives.

Or it can be read as an unavoidable step in the journey towards the reordering of South African society; an opportunity, albeit a problematic one, to lay new foundations for social justice. It is easy to see how the first reading lands us in the anguish of pretence. It is also easy to see how the second reading imposes enormous leadership and ethical responsibilities of whatever political movement deems itself as leading South Africa into being a just, nonracial and prosperous society. How does the movement succeed in infusing leadership and vision into all aspects of organisational life and public service and remain linked to civil society? In the first reading race is a political ball to be kicked in perpetuity in a society structurally retained as unjust. In the second reading race is a tool for principled long-range planning.

The relationship between race and leadership shows up in two more examples. First, for a people traumatised by the dormitory enclaves of township life, we have not developed a hard-nosed approach to eradicate these enclaves in time. There is nothing that could demonstrate more to South Africans and to the world that the new democracy fundamentally values the lives of its newly enfranchised citizens. Although we have built millions of new houses, we did not build communities. We merely added to the dormitory. To transform the dormitory over planned time into coherent, integrated communities, each with a new tax base in which responsible taxpaying citizens make local decisions about their livelihood, would be a signal of the greatest love the country has for itself and its people.

It goes without saying that with the greatest number of South Africans living in self-referential communities interacting with others on common objectives, racial consciousness will dwindle in the face of the predominant self-actualisation of black communities across the land.

I need hardly dwell on the long-term value of a high-quality schooling system to the eradication of racial thinking in South Africa. Admirably, we have allocated enormous financial resources to education, and the schooling system in particular, perhaps in the logic of redistribution or redress, but have yet to succeed in leading and managing the system as a "solemn commitment". A successful schooling system will see the end of affirmative action, a short-term measure that should never have been allowed to assume the status of a strategic objective. The development of all should have been the strategic guide.

The overriding issue is not that race has no role in our attempts to understand and explain both the history and the contemporary challenge of South Africa; rather, it is about how much we are willing to accord it primacy of explanation.

Depending on the choice we make, we either relive the past to no end or we create the future. The latter is the bigger challenge and requires that we recommit to our solemn commitment to nonracialism, accompanied by visionary and ethical leadership.

We must recommit to diversity in solidarity, collaboration, trust, accountability and civility, all of which have a binding effect that should allow us to be aware of barriers that could be permissive or inhibitive, but to learn to think and feel beyond them and across time.

Njabulo S Ndebele is an academic and writer and the former vice-chancellor of the University of Cape Town

TOPICS IN THIS ARTICLE

Tags

Comments

Breathtakingly lucid.

Simon Hartley on September 24, 2009, 10:08 am

One of the best things I've read in a South African newspaper in years. Thank you.

Adam Welz on September 26, 2009, 7:47 pm

Eloquent. I enjoyed this article both for its eloquence and logic. I truly believe a uniform education system lies right at the heart of solutions for South Africa's social problems. We are a wounded, and angry people. We need an education system that not only pursues economic objectives, but cultivates a culture of tolerance among South Africa's divers people. It must also be accepted that not all South African have the interests of the country at heart. It must also be accepted that on both sides of the racial divide there are those who will and must take their bitterness and resentment to the grave with them. The generations that existed during the heart of Apartheid South Africa must die out, but before they do, they must make sure they have passed on a different set of values for their children. Only an education untainted by socially divisive objectives can achieve this.

Colin Mateme on September 27, 2009, 4:39 am

I second you Simon. The racist perception that many have and deny even while they assert it in their and our reality is significantly buoyed up by the ones who write the stories; our media, who cluck like startled chickens at this criticism. This is largely the responsibility of the western cultural perspective, even when black journalists do the writing. We have a chance of throwing this collar off and we have no choice but to do so. We are not alone. Other nations such as America with its 'free press' have been caught in this bind for a very long time and on the current evidence will be in it for a very long time. It is an elusive slimy snake worthy of the image of Satan; elusive the the degree that it is even created by those who generate this image as something to be abhorred.
We briefly saw a way and many in SA lucidly continue to show the way by writing the truth whatever the current intellectual dispensation opines. Ndebele is right in asserting that the smile of acceptance is infectious both for the smiler and for the object of the smile.
But, although the presence of the great Snake is lucidly apparent, nobody can say it is easy.

James Edwards on September 27, 2009, 9:45 am

"So you move along in an unresolved situation, hoping for the best: locked in a space of anguish."

I'm a Coloured academic and I live abroad, perhaps for good (my wife is a foreigner). That statement encapsulates my feelings. I returned to South Africa in mid-1999, and I endured 7 heart-wrenching years and went through all the emotions as explained in the article. I couldn't take it anymore and we left. And yes, even though I'm not completely rid of these thoughts, my daily life is far more enjoyable, and I'm finally at a stage where I can say that I'm enjoying life with my wife and children. My children are my top priority. I vowed that they will never have to endure what I endured. I suffered enough under apartheid and I'm not prepared to suffer after the end of apartheid as well. In my view, South Africa received a wonderful second chance in 1994, but I doubt whether the leadership fully understands the severity of the situation currently in the country.

Leon McClusky on September 27, 2009, 12:54 pm

This is a study in cliche, I don't think the blacks are pretending to forgive. The fact is it's Ok for blacks to be anti-white, but whites who criticise any black person for good reason or not - however that's measured - are comfortably racist. No problem. Blacks in their victim mentality supremely fail to take ownership of their own failures.

Jason Whitehead on September 28, 2009, 1:43 am

Eloquent, flowing, nice to read prose, I concede. The main problem though is that Professor Ndebele's article is a cleverly evasive piece. Ndebele's overriding sentiment - that blacks have insufficeintly acknowledged their own role in the predicament they face in post-apartheid South Africa - overshadows what is truly absent in this piece i.e a similar degree of paced, careful, and ultimately hard hitting reflection on the realities that inform black people's continuing frustration with white South Africans as a whole. Yes, most people (black people that is) supported the negotiated settlement that formed the flawed framework in which they continue to exist today. However, it is just as well to recognise that the negotiated settlement was an imposition on the majority of disenfranchised and oppressed people. It was the violence, manipulated by the shadowdy hand of the apartheid state, that compelled the settlement. It was a black middle class political leadership, frightened of the revolutionary mood that segments of its popular base were in, who submitted to this compulsion. Yes, this black middle class leadership has partially benefited in the end, but only by leaving the essence of the white racist superstructure intact, stillborn affirmative action policies notwithstanding. So no surprise then that black people feel more disgruntled with white people than with their own elected leaders who haven't delivered. Who indeed on earth can expect any leadership to fully deliver when it leaves the keys to the kingdom - the economic wealth - essentially in the hands of those that were privileged by the color of their skin before? If black people continue to focus the blame for their present plight on white people and white racism, it is just as well, because the rule of the current black government (the ANC) exists in the matrix of continuing white control bolstered by the harder backdrop of capitalism and the exploitation of labour.

Trotsky Trotsky on September 28, 2009, 4:06 am

Trotsky,
You use assumptions and guesswork to build a patchwork that says whatever you want.%

Peter Win on September 28, 2009, 8:46 am

Njabulo Ndebele, an erstwhile UCT academic, is one of the best writers SA has produced. He is one of the best political commentators in Umzansi and yet he's not famous. We should elevate such people.

Marquis Of Beaconsfield on September 28, 2009, 9:09 am

Wouldnt it be great if could all speak to each other in the simplest of language that we all understand. Sometimes it seems to be a race amongst us to see who writes in the highest form of english and who can use the longest word to explain ourselves. Why do we do this? Anyway, here is the contradiction.When Obama hit the scene, everyone had their own ideas as to what agenda Obama would speak to. I would be bold enough to say that we(all africans) expected him to the the redresser of redressers. ie wiping the slate clean of all america's inhumanitarian,economic, social & other blunders. To say the least, we expected him to do godly things. What happened? Obama turned out to say a lot of nice but hollow words. Its the same with all govt. Practicalities (which is no excuse) and implementation becomes a demon all on its own. And that is where we as (south) Africans find ourselves. I still believe if ANC had its way it would have done exactly what their ideals stood for. But unfortunately, reality stared them in the face and they had to resort to all unknown practicalities to stabilise this country and continent on all fronts at the expense of their own agenda. I think if you look at Brazil,Venezuela,Bolivia and yes even Cuba, a line can be drawn indicating that implementation was the biggest challenge to all.So can we all agree that racism is rife and can we all agree that together we have to move as one to build a non-racist nation.

Kitty Kat on September 28, 2009, 1:29 pm

Thank you...enjoyed the article so much. Every day I wish we could get past "the past", but I wonder if we had a leader who understood things as clearly as you seem to, if he would be "allowed" to promote the changes needed?

terry thom on September 28, 2009, 1:31 pm

Well...erm...where does one start with a piece like this? I don't have the patience to list agreements and disagreements, so I add agreement to Trotsky Trotsky's comment (which, I think, sails to the heart of the matter here). Prof Ndebele seems to think he can change reality with his 'space-in-anguish' theory, but the thing that brought people to this 'space'(whatever the thing turns out to be in reality where identities are forged under the hammer of class interests, occasionally manifested along gender/belief/group/sexual orientation lines)in the first place cannot be suspended at will. Angry and disappointed and empoverished, I still don't share the class interests of some of those landing up with me in this "space of anguish" . I might share with them on a superficial level the same "space", but let's not be fooled by abstract concepts here: I am here because their support (tacit or overtly) for the SYSTEM (apartheid capitalism) ensured my position, along with millions of others like me. Peter Win, Trotsky Trotsky's point(s) drive home to heart and conscience the actual lesson to be learnt about the negotiated settlement: if the content of those proposals of the settlement were clarified to the ANC's support base then (and believe me, they would've understood that the outcome would be a rotten compromise on majority rule), we might've discussed different matters now...like how the institution called the JSE can be best used to communicate national need so production can finally be rationally planned. Your accusation that Trotsky Trotsky's comment is a mixed masala of assumptions and gueswork is really the result of a fruitful source of error - and that is that you reveal a lack of understanding what exactly was compromised at Codesa. The key evasion of Prof Ndebele is this: capitalism was supposed to solve most of today's inequalities (i.e. it was supposed to bring equity between races, sexes, etc). I don't have to tell you it didn't. And it cannot. A workers' democracy based on reorganising society's resources on the basis of need is charged with this task as a matter of policical necessity. This is where we must pitch the debate.

Steven Lamini on September 28, 2009, 2:24 pm

In the first reading race is a political ball to be kicked in perpetuity in a society structurally retained as unjust. In the second reading race is a tool for principled long-range planning.
====================================================

I think the ruling party gladly takes the first reading!

Mosala Balatseng on September 28, 2009, 3:45 pm

a well balanced assessment...well done.

ches sibbs on September 28, 2009, 4:09 pm

This is simply one of the most eloquent, insightful, sophisticated, humane and yet clear-eyed analyses of our social moment and problem, that I have ever read. Such quality sets the stage and the tone for a genuinely meaningful and reasoned debate, and I think Trotsky's objection in response rises to that level: his point is an important one, and it is presented lucidly, without rhetorical flourish. Please, let us maintain this standard of exchange, and not descend into defensive ad hominems, as some already have, above.

Konstantin Sofianos on September 28, 2009, 4:40 pm

Its a pity you chose to write in such contorted English on a subject that many whose first language may not be English could have made valuable contributions to. It shows the evasiveness and inherent elitism in your thinking processes - a tactic used by pseudo-intellectual bloggers on TL.

Trotsky Trotsky sums up your biased intent pretty accurately. I will focus on this meaningless statement:
"A successful schooling system will see the end of affirmative action, a short-term measure that should never have been allowed to assume the status of a strategic objective. "
In theory a "successful" schooling system should lessen the need for AA but still cannot eliminate AA since black graduates will still have to overcome discrimination in an economy dominated by whites?
How "short-term" do you think AA should be to? Remember the US, has implemented AA since the 1940s and they still have a ways to go. You are quick to speak about ending AA but what ideas do you have about redressing the present imbalances in our society?

The continued resistance of whites against AA using tactics out of the playbooks of American racist neo-cons, is disgusting and simply creates more frustration and anger among blacks, especially the younger generation.

Dave Harris on September 28, 2009, 8:11 pm

Garrulous rubbish for the most part.

We could sum your thoughts up with one question: "When are black South Africans going to move on?" Not in my lifetime. The scars of apartheid coupled with a culture of entitlement will not nudge the masses towards self reliance, or personal responsibilities, especially when these same masses are urged to think in 'groups' by various Woodworking failures and serial polygamists.

Societies moving through a metamorphosis from totalitarian peace, freedom through violence, and back to peaceful coexistence have only been witnessed in European, American and Asian nations. African countries have yet to display it can mature to any political level beyond retribution. So the hatred remains. The dynamical shift of Hegel's triad of thesis, antithesis and then ultimately synthesis, is something quite alien to South Africa, and so it shall remain in our lifetime.

Black South Africans simply cannot grow up. This is the sad truth. Mandela himself admonished us who dared questioned the ANC's ability to govern (pre-'94), and by that we meant effectively and efficiently. The hoary old, dog-eared race card was thrown out in response, by him. But, just as I knew (and not suspected), it has come to pass that the band of dolts and corrupt vagabonds that make up The ANC have proven completely incapable of managing anything more than a morning putty-push. They're scum. They're filth. They're your New (unimproved) South Africans to whom you all look for answers.

Good luck. You're all going to need it.

Don Mac on September 29, 2009, 12:26 am

Steven,
What hogwash.
You want to move back to a system like Cuba's that is so discredited? Or Russia - which is now more capitalist than America (and ten times as corrupt).

Come off it...

Peter Win on September 29, 2009, 10:18 am

@ Don Mac, Question: If there was no ANC who would have been better placed to MEDIATE and deliver democracy to this police and apartheid state? Or,what would have been your counter program to that of the ANC led govt? (ps, note that DA was not in existence at the time)

Kitty Kat on September 29, 2009, 10:21 am

@ Peter Win: Formal agreement about the character of Cuba and Russia (and I'll throw in China as a surprise bonus for you). The history of the domination of the bureaucracies in the countries mentioned and the identification of them with socialism has given rise to the incorrect conception that socialist planning is carried out by vast centralised authority which dictates to society. At issue for me is the separation of their state apparatuses from the rest of society. In other words, a democracy which has nothing in common with a mere policy or moral ideal, but active participation by the majority of society's citizens in the planning process to satisfy need. The JSE (and all other stock exchange instruments) as it is now reflect the movement of money and capital. Why is it so inconceivable that these institutions be used to reflect the decisions of the citizens and the implementation of those decisions? Of course you have no desire to consider this, there your pulling out of the bag the ex-Stalinist regimes of Cuba and Russia as a boogy man. But those were not examples of societies organised on the basis of need instead of profit. The usurpation of political and economic power by those bureaucracies represented the negation of such a vision. The key point I made in the earlier comment was that capitalist democracy was supposed to guarentee attainment of basic rights like racial equality, equality between sexes, etc and since it failed (I know why it failed and I cannot help wondering if you have a clue on this...), my basic postulate is that in today's world the only thing guarenteeing attainment of those equality ideals is the victory of a movement aiming to usher in a society organised on production for need instead of profit.

You talk of discreditation? Look around you. The entire system you stand in defence of registers one spectacular failure after another. Governments across the world shift the system's failure onto the shoulders of ordinary people. Bailouts, resuscitation packages, call them what you will, they are meant to prop up a system that holds no interest to ordinary people. Start here and then we can speak of what next.

Steven Lamini on September 29, 2009, 12:34 pm

A thought provoking and carefully researched academic work. Well done Prof. I guess this is going to be a difficult task to respond to Prof Ndebele's assertion. He is quite right that black South Africans are trying to put everything behind themselves by pretending as if everything is fine with their white compatriots. Well, its not. What actually happed during Codesa negotiations remains to be uncovered, leading to the building up of the negotiated settlement before 1994 elections. Of course, if you ask then leadership of the movement, the likes of Ramaphosa and others, they will tell you that the settlement was the best possible political solution available to prevent massive revulotionary action that would have taken place was it not for the settlemet. But the question to be asked is who are the beneficiaries of this settlement in a current political climate, how many white people are still occupying the positions of wealth and influence in our country and at what cost/expense is settlement being implemented. We have inherited the system which created a predominat class of anguished "black majority" people whose leadership have been caught between what Prof Ndebele refers to as the " movement of wealth from whites to blacks, in which blacks structurally join whites within the inherited social and economic structures of whiteness and all its rules and regulations governing rewards and incentives(the ruling political elite). This phenomenon vividly illustrates the deliberations of the negotiated settlement. Until this phenomenon changes, you will still get unwelcomed racial remarks/hatred from the majority sectors of the "periphery", same thing applies with such remarks/hatred from the "core". So much so, this anguish is never going to vanish over-night. As we move forward, we need to devise mechanisms and strategic approach to deal with such issues at a national level. We can no longer continue to ignore the pervasiveness of the situation with the hope that black people will gradually and eventually understand that they are in this predicamnet longer than they've expected. Of course, the government has embarked on a mission to de-racialise the country from the past shackles of oppression and racism, but they need to do more, they need to engage and deal with racial issues at face value, rather than trying to be diplomatic about a situation that requires a sense of revultionary mobilisation and change. Its time to take the "bull by its horns" and deal with social illenesses once and for all, and without delay. Real power is ecomomics and not vice versa.

Xolani Mfeka on September 29, 2009, 1:06 pm

Why is it that Black people are always expected to go an extra mile? My great grandfarthers were enslaved, maimed, raped and killed! Nelson Mandela edged us to revenge that with peace, we did. As I drive my car coming out of the former white surbubs I seem to annoy a lot of white people for no reason. I go to their pubs at night, they want to beat me up for no reason. I watch TV, Helen Zille calls a black president a rapist! I go on a corporate dinner, my white collegues ask me why am I still working, if I were them I would have already capitalized on BEE. All these things bring back the pain of the invading white nation that I have tried to forgive but keeps taking me back. Zuma has correctly pointed out that nation-building needs to be urgently brought back as part of governments priorities. Otherwise, I'm afraid racism is on the rise.

Freedom Ndlovu on September 29, 2009, 3:45 pm

To Freedom Ndlovu: For how many generations are you and your family going to carry the burden of grudges with you? And do you think you're the only people whose family suffered under some or other yolk? The old joke of having Xhosa-Alzheimer's rings true here (forget everything except the grudges).

And if you annoy a lot of white people, then there may be some clue there as to who is at fault. And you haven't exactly dug up a lot of sins there: I doubt people want to beat you up because you're black; Helen Zille was correct with her accusation (how this affects you, is anyone's guess); A white colleague asking why you're not capitalizing on your opportunities is hardly racist (or anything, really, other than mild curiosity). And if these things 'pain' you, then I suggest you take more stool softeners.

None of this - apart from your own searing hatred for white people - adds up to a reasonable reason to cast political stones against a certain race. Whites have already atoned for the sins of their fathers, and continue to. If anyone needs to move on, it is those with the political power to do so. What you lot lack, is WILL. There's simply too much profit in continuing the hate for you all. And racism will continue to rise for as long as people like yourself hang onto tenuous arguments supporting your right to hate.

Think about it. That's all.

Don Mac on September 30, 2009, 4:13 pm

I thought this was a very good article and the comments are illuminating. Many comments show that there is a need to blame whites/apartheid for all SA's current problems (the race card). I read the Prof to say you can do this but it's a hollow business as whites can't fix anything; they have very little really. A "black" government is in charge of just about every facet of SA, including the bulk of the investment/wealth. This government needs to acknowledge this and up or change its game. For SA, there is no other option. Whites can offer very little. Their prime purpose at present is to be convenient scapegoats.

SA Eish on October 1, 2009, 11:30 am

@ Prof. Ndebele: Strong reading, I do not agree with all, the general idea however is well said. It will take time to digest all of it but I really wish to read more in such context.

@SA Eish: The prime purpose of white SA citizens is two-fold: the convenient scapegoat AND the convenient tax payer who pays all.

@Don Mac: After a nights sleep I think you will agree that you shouldn't have included the second paragraph. By including it you unfortunately flattened you remaining good points to relatively meaningless phrases.

@Freedom Ndlovu: Why and for how long do you expect the Whites to go an extra mile ? Count how many Whites still around in SA were actively involved in the pre-1994 era and compare them to the number of Whites that inherited the deeds from that generation.

Oh, and I am so glad for you: You REALLY do not hate the Whites ... but Eish, all those bad "incidents" that you experience ... and - voila - your hatred is back. I seriously doubt that it was gone in the first place, just too convenient.

With just the same right I (not hating the Blacks !!) am referring to the incidents I read about every day where white people are brutally murdered by stealing and raping gangs of black criminals. In South Africa, in 2009. Guess what: Voila - my hatred is back.

For how long do you suggest we stick to that scenario ??

Just look at the 2 Germanys that still exist after the so-called reunification / reunion in 1989 / 1990. Past-1994 SA very much reminds me of the situation there.

Either the past is what it is: PAST. Learn from it; Most people I know are actually learning from it. Every day, to ensure history is not repeated.

Or if you don't want to, be at least honest: Do not pretend past is past but use it when it suits you ...

And to all the Marxists with all your oh so clever comments: your comments suck !! Marxism and Communism are history, over, done, gone, failed ... grow up.

Buz Zollner on October 1, 2009, 5:59 pm

Steven,

Strangely enough, I agree with you. I don't consider capitalism utopia by any means. In fact, I'd far rather support a socialist society like Sweden. And before that, I'd go for an idealist state such as you refer to. If it was proven to work.

However, I just don't see such an example that has proven itself. Every single command and control mechanism I've seen has been an absolute failure. It's when individual opportunities are given full rein that growth occurs - and excesses I grant you. But the exceeses are not nearly as bad as when someone like a Chairman Mao decides he knows whats best - and pumps money into sub-economic farming...and jails dissenters.

Who makes the decisions in your scenario ? And how is this controlled ? And why isn't it working now ? And why isn't it working in Zimbabwe ? And why are we fighting about Codesa when the ANC has an overwhelming majority ?

Even if we went to the extreme that all whites were kicked out of the country, do you seriously think that would alter anything?

Take a look at BEE/AA. All that does is ensure the brightest and the best whites with the most skills needed in SA are forced/encouraged to leave. Good riddance you might say, but no country can afford to have clever people of whatever persuasion leave.

So what do you have to offer instead?

Peter Win on October 2, 2009, 7:46 am

@Don Mac and Freedom Ndlovu (nad others)

The article is about the pretense of forigiving and forgetting. Our contributions made here indicate that we also havent quite forgiven or forgotten South Africa's very recent past. Lets not forget the even more recent content of the article, that it is DIFFICULT to forgive and forget something as violent, as dehumanising, as traumatic as apartheid for both those who were alive when it happened, and the so-called "born frees". The GOAL of the approach taken by the gov. of national unity IS to forgive, but I dont understand why we must aim to forget. Forgetting isnt part of the deal, is it?

Remembering what our nation went through and what it took to overcome in order for us to be where we are today is part of our national identity. It has the potential to contribute a great deal to where we go. The world looked and continues to look to us in many ways because of our past. Why do we want to forget that?

European nations particularly, and the North Americans with their statue of liberty, are well known for their practices of remembering and memorialising. They build monuments and libraries and museums to make their pasts live on forever. (Cecil John Rhodes stands very proud and triumphant right here in our very own Cape Town reminding us that he was here how many decades ago??? And yet we want to forget something that happened only 50 years ago from its start in 1948). Their children learn about the past at home, in schools, on television... and from the remembering and internalising of what happened in the past come lessons and values that inform what it means to be French, or German, American or British.

But South Africans want to forget?

I agree with Prof Ndebele that right now remembering might be hard because we dont quite know how to remember or what to do with that remembering in a creative way. I for one, will remember because it directly affected and continues to affect my family, my friends, and clearly the rest of the nation in a number of fundemental ways. The PAST is why, for example, when I take a walk in the Northen suburbs of JHB I have to walk on the road. There are no pavements to walk on because noone built them because the only people who walk the streets are black workers from OUTSIDE these suburbs. If I want to build pavements, it helps to understand why there are none in the first place.

We can not just forget. We must remember as we BUILD our future.

Speak Out on October 12, 2009, 10:57 am

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or sign up to comment

click here to log in

M&G Online Comment Guidelines In Brief

No hate speech;
No racist, sexist or homophobic remarks;
Keep it short;
Keep it on topic;
Show respect to all;
We reserve the right to remove or delete any comment without notice or reason.

Click here for the full Comment Guidelines

Advertising Links

Your M&G Online

Follow the Mail & Guardian on Twitter!

Direct message us on our mailandguardian account to chat to the M&G Online team.


		THIS WEEK'S PAPER Subscribe Subs promotions Get digital edition

Advertising links

OUDE MEESTER INSURANCE JUNCTION PROPERTY FOR SALE INTERNET SOLUTIONS COMPAQ LAPTOPS	MAP SEARCH HOLIDAY FINDER BID OR BUY INSURANCE YOU CAN TRUST

Of pretence and protest

Tags

M&G Online Comment Guidelines In Brief

Your M&G Online

Advertisements

Advertising links