/ 2 August 2011

Julius Malema and the racism red herring

<b>Verashni Pillay</b> says, Eric Miyeni is one of many trying to defend the indefensible: Julius Malema.

There is a new craze on Twitter: the racially-charged impossible-to-answer-question. Throw it at a public figure and watch them squirm.

It started on Twitter, as these things often do. A series of small grumblings — tremors, if you will.

I dubbed it the Malema backlash, and its proponents were on a mission after a series of media reports these past few weeks on the ANC Youth League president’s allegedly dubious finances and allegations of bribery and tender rigging, first reported by the City Press.

“Blacks are viewed with suspicion because black is the face of corruption in the media,” said one.

“I bet you DA is funded by big white money, not black money. What is their agenda and how did they acquire their wealth?” began another.

And, of course: “If Malema had been the obedient native, all this corruption talk would not exist.”

So went the tremors. Then the earthquake: formerly respected author Eric Miyeni’s vile column in the Sowetan accusing City Press editor Ferial Haffajee of being a “black snake” who deserved to be necklaced with a burning tyre around her neck.

Miyeni went beyond the impossible-to-answer-question to sheer hate speech. But he was acting within the context of a debate across various social media that has become increasingly ugly.

The charge has been led in part by well-known singer Simphiwe Dana, who has devoted the copious amount of time she spends on Twitter to asking difficult questions to people in power: opposition leader Helen Zille, newspaper editors, spokespersons, etc. The theory is that the media is obsessing about corruption within the ANC and ignoring any corruption in the opposition party, or among white people generally.

“Why does CT honour colonial thugs like Cecil Rhodes and Jan van Riebeek?” and “Has the DA done anything about the rampant racism in CT?” she asked DA spokesperson Lindiwe Mazibuko, before that particular exchange dissolved into a spectacular late-night spat on Twitter for everyone to see.

Which are all valid questions. But Twitter is completely the wrong medium for it. We end up sowing seeds of discord, glorifying ourselves in the process and doing nothing for the still crucial project of national reconciliation.

There was a reason we had a Truth and Reconciliation Commission that produced several volumes of content. Reducing critical matters of our national debate to 140 characters is silly at best and devious at worst. Asking an extremely sensitive question of a high-profile leader on a platform such as Twitter sets them up for failure. If they try to answer within the medium, the questioner will immediately vilify them for not doing the question justice or evading the real issue. If they don’t answer they are attacked for not answering to the people.

Damned if they do, harassed if they don’t.

I believe in interrogating the media’s power and bias where it exists. But using that in defence of Malema just boggles my mind: what a waste of a person’s energy — he’s the last person that needs it. The 19-year-old kid living in Alex with no qualifications and no hope of a job needs it. The honest black businessmen who get frozen out of every lucrative government deal because of rampant nepotism need it. The elderly women who clean up after us in our homes, restaurants and places of work, serving us tea and mopping up our mess, need it. Malema? Not so much. But it’s convenient to jump to his defence from the comfort of our keyboards instead of getting up, going out and confronting the real and frightening marginalisation of so many people in South Africa.

Malema, on the other hand, enjoys immense power and wealth, and has done next to nothing for our country’s disenfranchised youth. He doesn’t need your help. What he needs is to answer the serious questions relating to alleged fraud and corruption.

His would-be champions do themselves and their cause a disservice when they invoke racism in his defence. It is merely a ploy, started by the ANCYL, to deflect attention away from the real issue: how Malema has allegedly been running Limpopo’s government as his personal piggy bank.

Every time we cry racist we cheapen the term when it deserves to be used.

Assuming the media does not investigate corruption when it is perpetrated by white people is laughable. Look at the treatment of estate agent Wendy Machanik, the DA’s posturing around the open-toilets debate not to mention this newspaper’s history of investigating and exposing the horrors of apartheid when it certainly was not expedient to do so. This is not to say that racism is not a problem in the media: that is a discussion that definitely must happen. But it should be done for the right reasons, not as a red herring for Malema’s questionable leadership and alleged fraud.

  • You can read Verashni’s column every week here, and follow her on Twitter here.