It is not a tenuous concern. It has already blurred, at times justifiably, at other times irrationally, the major issues facing this country and if it continues, could overwhelm them. It is taking place against the background of the greatest humanitarian crisis since the Second World War – a crisis that can be traced back to those very race and cultural divisions that we so easily flaunt with in the current racial rhetoric. It’s like witnessing a child play with an explosive substance. It has to be stopped; not by covering it up, but by an increased awareness and appreciation of just how dangerous it can be if it is allowed to run away with itself.
After more than 20 years, clearly much still has to be done in moving from structured segregation to multi-cultural integration. The invidious inherited structural undertones of inequities, inequalities, lack of opportunities, and training and education deficits have in turn fuelled flashpoints in expectations, entitlement, race and class privilege, and continued discrimination.
There is a simple choice in addressing inequity: intense, massive and forced redistribution; or accelerated economic growth to draw in and advance the previously disadvantaged. The first could be disastrously costly; the second demands patience, tolerance and a concerted effort at other forms of reconciliation. The first could in any case severely impede the second, without which the first becomes unaffordable and suicidal – a classic vicious cycle.
We have tried some form of combination of the two and have at best had mixed results. This could be largely attributed to external factors, but we cannot fully dismiss the cost of emphasis on the first option in impeding the second. At the very least, those who speak lightly of “economic transformation” show scant appreciation of the highly complex and multi-faceted forces at work in ensuring sustainable economic growth; especially in this world of fickle capital and quaking shifts in conventional structures of wealth creation.
On top of that there is no guarantee that the first option of massive redistribution will make much difference to social cohesion itself. We have not only made race synonymous with inequity, but for the most part exclusively the ongoing cause of it. Yet polarising inequities exist increasingly across the world, both internationally and domestically.
Making those inequities colourless, will give some respite in race relations but could exacerbate them in a class form and with all very much poorer. Relying mostly on regulation to change behaviour is seldom effective. But at the very least, the regulatory framework needs reviewing to create new targets that shift away from exclusively measuring wealth inequities and to include social cohesion goals.
American writer and Nobel laureate, Toni Morrison once said: “The very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again, your reason for being.”
As much as racism distracts the victim, the victim can also use it as a distraction. This is particularly true of leaders who time after time use the “race card” to deflect accountability. (See latest example here.) It has become fashionable to silence critics by implying some racial bias in the censure. Once that sticks, it mutes further criticism not only of the source but the subject as well. In addition, it fuels anger and polarisation.
We cannot underplay the lingering and justifiable anger and resentment that many in South Africa still have about the past. But if we can learn one thing from history, it is that civil strife and sectarian violence mostly have their roots in inherited anger and resentment; emotions that are deliberately or even unwittingly passed on from one generation to the next, sometimes spanning centuries.
Racism is about individual behaviour. As such it is the one thing, more than any other, which we can control as people and help shape our national destiny. We all have our prejudices. It is how we act on them that defines who we are. Prejudices are easy to justify, entrench and confirm. But they are also barriers to knowledge and self-actualisation.
But let’s acknowledge an important falsehood first: the iniquitous generalisations that ignore the very many expressions and acts of goodwill between people of all colours, the many close bonds people have across colour lines and the majority that harbour no ill-will towards others. (See example here).
That said, I have for a long time felt that in the interest of so-called “robust debate” and freedom of expression, we more often than not are simply discourteous and impolite. We see it everywhere: in comments on websites, interviewers and debates on television and of course the crescendo of garbage on social media. It seldom contributes to increasing knowledge and understanding.
Clearly, as a nation, we have to learn to deal differently with social media. It has the ability to catapult the petty and irrelevant into the mainstream; into national consciousness to give it a status far beyond that which could be compared to the cacophony of inanities and profanities one hears in the local pub.
But here’s the paradox: notwithstanding the deep hurt and sensitivities that exist, the most effective way of defusing racism and racial slurs is by not taking the rhetoric itself too seriously at a personal level. Ridicule is always an effective counter to any insult. It means simply: don’t hurt, and don’t be hurt. The latter is as much in our control as the former.
Of all of the most majestic goals we can have as a nation, there is none greater than achieving a state of peaceful multi-culturism. It overshadows in significance any other and can be an example that could take all of humanity a giant leap forward, particularly in these very turbulent times and what’s happening elsewhere.
We held that position for a brief period after 1994. We can recapture it.