Racial scapegoating is an old tool
A big thank you to Professor Jonathan Jansen for, as always, being a thought leader. His article “Manyi is not alone in his racism” (March 4) stimulated me to further thought about how easily demagogues and their accompanying elites can, and have, manipulated such factors as race as soon as they feel their power slipping.
Scapegoat groups are usually targeted not only because they are identifiable as “other” but also because they have resources or status that is envied. Such resources can be seized to buy off those whose support is needed by the power-seekers.
We have seen this happen many times in the recent history of Africa — the Indians in Uganda, Tutsis in Rwanda and white farmers in Zimbabwe, to mention just a few. We could equally look at the history of the former Yugoslavia and Germany, but it is Africa I am interested in because this is where I was born and raised and where I choose to live.
We must continue to challenge the way in which this racial stratification obscures the real question of how we build a just society that can sustain all its people. If we do not, then as power begins to slide from the hands of those who wish to hold on to it we have several ready-made potential scapegoat groups in this country: Indians in KwaZulu-Natal, coloureds in the Western Cape and whites everywhere.
It requires minority groups too to get off their self-righteous high horses about Jimmy Manyi’s statement, dreadful though it was, and commit themselves to the work of healing our historic divisions and establishing a more equal society in which every person experiences himself or herself as a valuable and valued human being. — Diane Salters, Simon’s Town
Rather than blame Manyi or praise Trevor Manuel, people blame the Shaiks and the Guptas. But why do Indian merchants make it? Is it hypocrisy, politicians, the system? The Indian and the coloured communities in our country have things to be proud of.
As a person who grew up among the Indian community, I am proud of a community that was rejected by apartheid but, instead of blaming anyone, set out to build its schools, colleges and universities. Its areas were peri-urban camps, infested with disease and hunger, but today some of them rival and at times are ahead of suburbs such as Umhlanga.
When we said, “Freedom now, education later”, they educated themselves. They took to the outskirts of towns and major cities and transformed them into major sites of commerce. What came out was the Indian intellectual, merchant, doctor— Today in KwaZulu-Natal, it is often said they control 45% to 65% of our regional economy, but their schools continue to be a lifeline for many blacks.
Yes, in KwaZulu-Natal “Africans” and “Indians” have issues because of apartheid, but it is time we worked together rather than apart. We need to study our history and learn from one another.
I believe that from Indians we can learn how to develop young intellectuals, merchants, doctors and so on, and how to transform our townships and villages. As a community of Africans, we need to heal, to write our separate histories and build a united society. — Thabani Dhladhla, eMgungundlovu, KZN
Security Branch raises its ugly head
The visit by police to the public protector’s office in response to a finding critical of the police commissioner is certainly troubling. The Mail & Guardian is right to criticise such behaviour (“Crude attack on protector“, editorial, March 4).
But it is wrong to say that it is reminiscent of the Thabo Mbeki government’s undermining of the public protector. What the M&G means by this is that the public protector under Mbeki sometimes drew conclusions that did not suit the M&G‘s political agenda. The Mbeki government did not undermine the legal process through the illicit use of its police, although Jacob Zuma and his propagandists incessantly claimed that this was happening and the M&G and other news media repeated Zuma’s and his propagandists’ claims.
There is also a major difference between the decisions of current and previous public protectors. The current public protector is not dealing with a tricky, intricate problem, as former ones sometimes did. She had to determine only whether the tender process for the new police headquarters had been followed. As it had not, misconduct had occurred, and the commissioner of police was the officer in charge. It required no courage, unless one assumes that telling the truth is dangerous, which would be another change from actual (as opposed to ostensible) conditions under the Mbeki government.
Admittedly, the use of the police or spy services for private political gain did occur in the past. The former head of the National Intelligence Agency, Billy Masetlha, used his organisation’s resources to smear and intimidate Zuma’s enemies — with the help of the media. Later, the crime intelligence police illegally spied on the Scorpions and then gave the material to Zuma’s lawyers, who used it selectively (helped by the media, including the M&G) to bully the public prosecutor into derailing Zuma’s corruption trial.
In short, what is happening to the public protector (and, more broadly, to the system of checks and balances restraining police power and promoting justice) has characterised Zuma’s career for a long time. Those who supported Zuma for the presidency knew this.
For the M&G to fling up its hands at the corruption of the regime it helped install is like the chief of police in Casablanca being “shocked, shocked” to discover gambling going on at Rick’s. It may be that, just as the police service has been paramilitarised with its new rank structure, Crime Intelligence is returning to its old status as the Security Branch.
If so, the right-wing tendencies of the Zuma regime are restoring many of the characteristics of the apartheid state. To discourage us from worrying about this, the press presents us with the glories of the State of the Nation address (a tawdry display of Zuma’s serial mendacity) and of the Budget speech (Pravin Gordhan’s declaration of personal and national bankruptcy).
The press seems happy for us all to go to hell, provided that it can scribble occasional moralising editorials as the fires grow hotter around us. — Mathew Blatchford, Fort Hare
Nothing gay about still being in the closet
It is hard not to like the recognisable lyricism of Mark Gevisser’s writing (“To be black and gay in Soweto“, March 4). His style can be — is — seductively gentle and makes a reader feel guilty for even being tempted to respond critically.
I do wish that these kinds of stories would be written and told by black gay men and women themselves. When will we own our own voices, our own stories, our own trials and tribulations? Gevisser did very well in this piece to give voices to the persons in the story, but it remains that, a literary act of giving voice to someone else’s life.
More importantly, it is worth reflecting on why it is that black men and women do not routinely tell these stories themselves. Despite the observations of the black man in the story about the “freedom” that younger gay people now have, the truth is that it is a complicated freedom. Many black gay people still live in a sea of homophobia. They negotiate this homophobia rather than experiencing freedom in the same banal way that heterosexuals can and do.
And so it might (or might not) surprise Gevisser to know that I could write a dozen stories of black gay men and women still suffocating in closets everywhere in this, the 17th year of our liberal democracy. Some offer a whiff of heterosexualism to their homophobic families and colleagues by committing to marriage in the hope of not being asked about what happens “after nine”. Others don pin-striped suits during the week, in which they rehearse their straight-acting or asexual selves and then let their gay hair down for 72 hours come Friday.
This is not a moral criticism. The point is simpler: the story that Gevisser tells in this beautiful piece should not be wrongly read as a piece of history. It remains the reality. The real conclusion is much more challenging. You cannot legislate tolerance, let alone acceptance. We are not there yet. — Eusebius McKaiser, Wits Centre for Ethics
Popcru report malicious
Your article “Cele saga divides union” (March 4) was one of much malice against the integrity of the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (Popcru). The purpose of these malodorous statements is to undermine the functionality of Popcru and its membership and disrupt our election processes, which resumed on March 1 and culminate at the national congress in June.
You say Vukile Pambo “was allegedly fired by Popcru for exposing corruption”. For the record, he was dismissed for fraudulent activities in diverting recruiting incentives for his benefit and that of his partner and the partner of a former unit head at the expense of members. He took the matter to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and he should apprise the public of the outcome. He was dismissed for dishonesty after due process and was found guilty. Further, he incited officials to resign from the organisation and continues to campaign against Popcru.
It is disingenuous to allege that the special extended national executive committee was convened solely to deal with the “Cele saga”. It was a scheduled event to discuss, among other things, the finalisation of 2010 central executive committee matters.
We interrogated the 92-page public protector’s report released on February 22 and generally welcomed the findings. Our position is that we appreciate what the public protector has done on three counts: the investigation of what happened, what should have happened and whether there is any ground for charges of maladministration, prejudice or gross violation of the Public Finance Management Act and other statutes.
We said there is a need for workers to be allocated office space, but proper processes must be followed. To suggest that “senior union officials did not approve of the decision” is injurious to democratic centralism and the internal democracy of Popcru.
The leadership views these injurious statements in a very serious light and trusts that our rank and file shall disregard them as worthless. — Norman Mampane, national spokesperson, Popcru
Holocaust spooks Hamas
You report that Hamas has vowed — yes, vowed — to stop the United Nations Relief and Works Agency from teaching the Holocaust, saying that “it will poison their minds” (Briefs, March 4).
The piece points out that the UNRWA is responsible for the welfare of Palestinian refugees and teaches 200 000 children in Gaza. Hamas also said that Holocaust studies “serve the Zionist entity — to justify acts of slaughter against the Palestinian people”.
Hamas should be concerned about the Holocaust being taught to its children. It may result in Palestinian children being exposed to a context and an understanding of the Jewish state, placed as it is in a region filled with Holocaust-denial and Jew-hatred. They might think that Jews are not the monstrous enemy constantly depicted. — SC Weiss, Johannesburg