The South African political settlement between 1994 and 1996 was a monumental event that reshaped history. It mandated the state to establish a new societal order, challenging existing norms and structures. The success of the pre-1994 state, built on a form of despotism, created a 'normality' that was incompatible with the principles of non-racial equality and unity. Yet, there are those who still miss that past with a passion.
The outcome of the
settlement was celebrated as a global benchmark, and it made racism and sexism illegal in
RSA. This not only made restitution, empowerment, and recognition of past
injustices matters of national and public interest but also significantly
altered the social and economic hierarchy of RSA, which had been rooted in
racism for decades. Where the rich are all can be, save for few outstanding economic emancipation barriers still stubbornly gate keeping the financial services sector.
Consequently, the lens of policymaking became that of the society the law created and regulated. The reality that it is illegal to be racist poses a significant challenge for sections of South African society. Equally, the constitutional obligation to heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice, and fundamental human rights represents a profound discomfort for those socialised to be separatist in outlook.
In human
terms, the full realisation of the non-racial potential of those who believe
they will thrive in spaces where they are 'concentrated as a group' would
require the intellectual change witnessed in 1994 and during national
team matches and the heart and soul of being South African.
In a racially polarised
political context like South Africa, when the concepts of civil rights and
solidarity movements are presented as a means to truncate the state-sponsored
national project of fulfilling the liberation promise to all South Africans, the
goals of those promoting this agenda become more insidious. The stark and
inconvenient truth is that societal decisions are influenced by how each
community understands social justice and economic equity and the
political and ideological strength of competing groups and narratives.
Once an ideology—the set
of beliefs and ideas that collectively explain the trade-offs and compromises
that societies undertake—takes hold, it shapes how a society is organised. In
RSA, the apartheid ideology and its material benefits continue to inform,
consciously or otherwise, arguments for the continuation of a racially
engineered inequality regime or order. The internal coherence and sincere
belief in a "racially construed social justice," which enabled the
criminality of the apartheid system to function, developed its own grammar and
vocabulary. The extent to which this developed grammar and vocabulary align
with what is beneficial for humanity has become a defining feature of race
relations in South Africa.
The history of
interactions between Black and White South Africans has been characterised by
conquests and dispossessions. As the pursuit of recognising the consequential
injustices unfolds, it becomes apparent that the struggle is
between a supremacist ideology and the quest for justice. This has become so
blatant that notions of a 'Western community' with an undefined indigenousness
are coined to introduce a new racial hierarchy in an otherwise non-racial
constitutional and democratic order.
At a time when rising
inequality, whose demographics confirm race as an underlying vector, threatens
RSA's social cohesion, asserting that lawful restitution and comprehensive
healing of the injustices of the past should be ceased is both unconscionable and
indicative of historical ignorance and arrogance. Exploiting the Trump moment, which might
suggest ideational poverty in articulating ideas across the proverbial
discourse line, could be misreading the global balance of power by proponents
of the status quo. The reality is that the distribution of political power at
any given time is influenced by the interplay between the immediate rationality
of occurrences and the enduring intellectual developments that generate diverse
solutions available during critical situations.
We should begin to
accept as South Africans that the accumulation of privilege is always the
outcome of a social process, dependent, among other factors, on power relations
and the capital (political, social, and economic) amassed by humanity over
time. How such accumulations occur will define their acceptability in the
present or for posterity. Often, the selfish and myopic interests of those in
the whirlpool of opportunity inspired by incumbency create conditions of
conflict for future generations. History has produced several such leaders, and
South Africa may be experiencing a phase marked by an absence of inclusive
leadership.
Two fundamental themes have been woven throughout South Africa's history, requiring attention—mistrust between racial groups and a fear of non-racial equality. Despite the failure of race-defined or construed self-determination, the myth of its possibility continues to propel cult-like behaviour aimed at forcing separate development and arguably returning to apartheid templates within an otherwise non-racial democratic order.
This serves to initiate the complex dialogue.
Comments
Post a Comment