(Graphic: John McCann/M&G)
According to research conducted by the Institute of Race Relations, South Africa currently has 142 race-based laws on the statute book.
This is a fact that all South Africans who believe in a truly just society, where all are treated equally, should be deeply concerned about.
It is common knowledge that the National Party (NP) government did not preside over a just society. Central to its policy of Apartheid was a laundry list of racial laws that gave preferential treatment to white South Africans at the expense of their black counterparts.
An example of a racial law was the Mines and Works Act of 1956, which continued an established practice of reserving skilled labour for white people.
These racial laws had a profoundly detrimental impact on the country. They entrenched racial inequality, polarised society, and tarnished its reputation on the international stage.
The democratic breakthrough of 1994 should have signalled the end of an era of racial discrimination and a shift towards a truly fair society, where all people are treated equally regardless of their skin colour. But the African National Congress (ANC), as always, did not discern our history’s important lesson.
Since then, it has gone on to surpass South Africa’s Apartheid-era peak of number of race laws on the book (1980 – 123 laws).
The justification the ANC and its associates have consistently provided for this is that these laws are aimed at addressing past injustices, and that comparing them to Apartheid laws is a false equivalence because their intention is to empower and not marginalise.
This is a questionable argument on its own merits, but it also does not negate the inherently discriminatory nature of post-1994 racial laws.
Whether the intention is to empower or marginalise, the fact remains that these laws practically privilege one group of taxpaying citizens over another group of taxpaying citizens.
Racial quotas in universities (for instance), which are purportedly aimed at increasing the enrolment of “previously disadvantaged groups”, give preferential treatment to black students at the expense of their blameless white counterparts.
Much like the NP’s practice of reserving opportunities, the University of KwaZulu-Natal’s (UKZN) medical school reserves 69% of its 250 spots annually for black students. Indian students have a 19% quota, coloureds a 9%, and whites a meagre 2%.
This means that students do not have equal access to tertiary education – a clear violation of the principles of equality and merit.
The interesting thing about proponents of such laws is that they actually do not deny that they do discriminate against other people in practice. They merely attempt to justify and dignify such discrimination by arguing that the “positive discrimination” is necessary for addressing existing imbalances – which it plainly is not.
What these individuals either do not realise or refuse to acknowledge is that racial laws have continued to impact the country negatively under a democratic dispensation.
“Broad-Based” Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) has undoubtedly, and sadly predictably, enriched and continued to largely benefit a tiny politically connected elite, thereby perpetuating the very inequality it is meant to address.
The racial quota system has greatly contributed to the emergence and growth of an ethno-nationalist party such as the National Coloured Congress (NCC), which campaigns on a divisive platform.
While its grievances about the exclusion of the coloured community are legitimate, the antagonism that several of its members have displayed towards black South Africans is both concerning and misdirected.
The real culprit here is the ANC, whose racial laws have generated a sense of political exclusion among the coloured community.
Recently, the signing of the Expropriation Bill into law prompted US President Donald Trump to sign an executive order that suspends aid to South Africa and makes provisions for the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees.
A quick reading of the executive order reveals that racially discriminatory laws are one of the underlying factors that have influenced American policymakers to produce it.
This finding underscores how racial laws are tarnishing the county’s image in the US.
The South African government believes that AfriForum, among other civil organisations, is to blame for spreading “misinformation” about the country. But this is not true.
AfriForum has only drawn attention to the systematic marginalisation of minorities in the country through racially discriminatory legislation. It has challenged the global assumption that the differential treatment of citizens on a racial basis came to an end in the 1990s.
There is no question about the importance of empowering the disadvantaged, but this empowerment must not – and need not – come at the expense of other people.
The Institute of Race Relations’ non-racial Economic Empowerment for the Disadvantaged (EED) policy, and the Free Market Foundation’s Liberty First recommendations, are credible alternatives to racial legislation. Empowerment must not be construed as a zero-sum game.
EED broadly proposes to empower poor people on the basis of actual disadvantage and not skin colour. Such a policy, which will primarily benefit poor black South Africans, is necessary for charting the country on a path of equality, unity, and prosperity.
Ayanda Sakhile Zulu is an independent writer and researcher. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Pretoria and is an Associate of the Free Market Foundation.