I am always disappointed by the reaction of my peers when I express my genuine political views. Unlike most white South Africans, I do not support the Democratic Alliance. Other white South Africans react to this news with shock and, on the occasions when I am not faced with angry outrage, any political discussions are abruptly terminated. We South Africans do discuss politics at the dinner table these days, but only when everyone present is in agreement.
By contrast, most black voters I know are inclined to the African National Congress camp. This implies a racial polarisation in South African politics that is confirmed by the numbers. Compare our most recent census data with the results of our most recent election.
The conclusion is inescapable. White people are very likely vote for the DA, which has a white leader and fields a large proportion of white candidates. Black people are very likely to vote for the ANC, which has a black leader and fields a very large proportion of black candidates.
It is only in the other racial groups, making up 12.4% of our population, that the ANC and the DA really have anything to play for. The only exception is Northern KwaZulu-Natal, where the amaZulu tend to vote for the IFP and the amaXhosa tend to vote for the ANC.
I believe that the only explanation for this is that we are still racists. If true, this is disturbing and infuriating. It implies that, seventeen years after Freedom, we still have no real political discourse in our country and that our political landscape, rather than being shaped by the issues of the day, is shaped by an accident of genetics as arbitrary as the distinction between two sports teams.
Still racists
This, too, is born out by daily experience. We don’t actually have any meaningful political discourse but rather alternating rounds of increasingly hysterical recriminations about matters that don’t really have much to do with the running of the country.
In South Africa, different population groups get completely different views of our political reality. Township dwellings are being upgraded in their tens of thousands from shacks to government-built RDP houses. One hundred and twenty-one billion Rand has been allocated to this in the 2011 budget. White people don’t see this because houses are already nice in white areas. One hundred and eighty-nine billion Rand has been allocated to education in the 2011 budget. White people don’t see this because the schools in white areas are already good.
Yes, there are problems in South Africa and some things are not going as well as they should be. Some political dissonance is inevitable in a democratic society and it should be welcomed. When this political dissonance happens along rigidly defined racial lines, however, something is badly wrong. It means that we are not mixing. We are not sharing experiences. We are simply not reading each others’ news.
Last night I attended a comedy show in which the performer observed that “The Rainbow Nation” is a perfect name for South Africa. Just like in a rainbow, our colours are rigidly compartmentalised and easily distinguished from one another at a great distance.
Related posts:
Andrew is this really the best you can do. In fact i believe that it is people like you, with pictures like the one here, that fuel racial hatred. You state “Yes, there are problems in South Africa and some things are not going as well as they should be. Some political dissonance is inevitable in a democratic society and it should be welcomed” when in fact a review by the APRM monitoring project, which is jointly run by the SA Institute of International Affairs, the Centre for Policy Studies and the Africa Governance, Monitoring and Advocacy Project paints a completely different picture:
SA gets worst possible ratings – report
Johannesburg – South Africa received the worst possible rating on several governance aspects in an independent peer review report released on Tuesday.
The country’s police “force” and the government’s handling of xenophobia, crime and corruption are some of the criticisms in the document, entitled, “Implementing the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM): Views from Civil Society”.
President Jacob Zuma and Parliament also came under fire.
Threat to press freedom
Under a category on protection of the media, it warns of threats to press freedom.
The report calls for a judicial inquiry into “allegations of criminality, corruption, inappropriate political interference, nepotism and maladministration occurring within the SAPS”.
It calls for crime statistics to be released more regularly, instead of just once a year.
State and party lines are blurred
The government received the worst possible rating, red, for “an element of denialism” about xenophobia, state-party separation and relationships, cadre deployment and politicisation of institutions and regulating private funding to political parties.
A red rating means “no progress has been achieved on addressing the issue; or very little progress has been achieved and the government does not seem to be on track to complete it in the near future”.
“The president should provide particular leadership in making party-state distinctions. Holding office for the entire country, the president needs to guard against the commandeering of state resources for party ends,” the report reads.
“The distinction between the state and the political party has become blurred.”
Poverty, unemployment and corruption also received red ratings.
“Given the perceptions of corruption in South Africa and that government did not follow through with the APRM’s recommendations on protecting whistleblowers, the evaluating group felt that a red rating was justified.”
Parliament was asked to improve reports from committees and “upgrade the quality of debate”. A policy on attendance for MPs was also needed.
Let us for argument sake look at the stats released by the SAPS for 2009/2010 and the picture of one of the most violent populations on this planet emerges, a country on the verge of colapse like our next door neighbours Zimbabwe:
The following stats from; http://www.saps.gov.za/statistics/reports/crimestats/2010/categories.htm
Year 2009/2010
Murders – 16834
Sexual Offences – 68332
Aggravated House Robberies – 18786
Carjackings – 13902
Common Street Robberies – 64670
and all you can do is stir more hatred by posting the above picture shame on you Andrew shame on you
Wessel.
Is this the best I can do? What does that even mean? Is that a throw-away comment indicating your disapproval, or do you really believe that my writing is somehow deficient because you don’t agree with it? Come on, dude, this isn’t high school. You need to consider the facts.
Have you actually read the APRM report discussed in the news story that you have quoted? You should, and you can download it here.
It will become evident to you that the journalist involved mislead you grossly when using the expression “worst possible rating” in the headline.
To start with, the report does not rate our democracy against objective benchmarks, but rather measures the progress made on certain large or small problem areas since the last report released in, I believe, 2006. Of the 22 issues raised in 2006, the report considers us to have made progress on all but seven.
In other words, when the report gives us a “red light” for “Regulating private funding to political parties,” it does not mean that our regulation of private funding to political parties gets the worst possible rating. It simply means that this area has not been addressed since 2006. This report says unequivocally that the governance of our country has improved since 2006 in the overwhelming majority of areas that were examined.
This is good news, not bad news.
The news story that you have pasted into the comment is available here.
These two links give vastly differing pictures. I will discuss the press in greater detail in a later blog post, but it won’t do any harm for my readers to think about the twisted half-truths that have been presented so sensationally in this Fin24 article.
What about the crime stats that you have quoted? Well, I followed your link and from the same set of statistics, I learned the following:
In fact, Wessel, there has been a reduction in the crime rate in almost every category that is reported in these statistics. Once again, this is good news.
Basically, therefore, you are only really offended by the picture that I chose to illustrate the post. Does it incite ethnic hatred to show pictures from the Holocaust? I don’t believe that argument would find much favour because these photos are generally considered a reminder of tragic and evil human folly, there to ensure that we never make the same mistake again.
So it is with a great many apartheid-era photographs. You should remember that the evils committed under apartheid do not evaporate because white people are embarrassed about them. They resulted in lasting psychological damage, embedded deeply within our national consciousness. This damage is not only present in the victims of apartheid, but also in those of us who were complicit – even unwittingly – in the regime.
If some of these pictures are shocking and thought provoking, then perhaps they serve as a reminder to us all of how far we have come, and a welcome wake-up call from our current state of dangerous political catatonia.
Andrew
Andrew
Let me start by saying that being condescending does not make you appear more intelligent.
The picture you posted as far as I am concerned, and it really is only my opinion, is just sensation seeking on your part and serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever. Nobody denies that apartheid happened or that it created terrible suffering and humiliation for black people but we should be looking at reconciliation we all need to work together to develop this country sitting pointing fingers at each other will achieve nothing but more division. Why don’t you highlight some positive things that will actually uplift people make them feel good about living in this beautiful country, make them want to participate in its future.
Let us now look at the facts regarding the APRM report:
What I was trying to highlight in the APRM report, which in fact I read, and which you clearly chose to ignore is that the allegations in the report that was not addressed by the government and that were rated red, issues like the threat to press freedom, one of the cornerstones of any functional democracy, allegations of criminality, corruption, inappropriate political interference nepotism and maladministration occurring within the SAPS, state and party lines that are blurred, “an element of denialism” about xenophobia, state-party separation and relationships, cadre deployment and politicisation of institutions and regulating private funding to political parties are all serious threats to our democracy and should not be tolerated.
The Crime Statistics:
It should be noted that I find 16834 murders per year or a rate of 34.1 murders per 100 000 people unacceptable even if it is 8.6% better than the previous period. You however seem to be comfortable with it.
Here is a report by the South African government that indicate that the drop in the level of crime for the 2009/2010 period was in part due to the Football World cup and that the crime situation during the world cup and post world cup are two completely different things and that the rate increased again after the world cup skewing the 2009/2010 figures http://www.southafricaweb.co.za/article/south-african-crime-statistics
To get a better understanding of the actual rate we will have to wait for the 2010/2011 statistics to be released early in September 2011. Andrew you seem to believe that because the statistics show a decrease in crime we should be grateful, well here’s the official feeling: “The police officials say that, while the drop is significant, the murder rate is still too high, as high as in the most violent places in the world, including war zones” and maybe you are prepared to accept this and might even feel that it is your just deserves for the way you treated the previously disadvantaged people, you are after all white and old enough to have actively participated in apartheid. I have a serious problem with the way the country is governed at the moment not because the current government is of a different ethnic group or race but because they are mismanaging the country. Were it not for the current extremely high levels of corruption and fraud and several other serious issues highlighted in the APRM report a lot more could have been done for the very people that have suffered under the previous corrupt regime and are again suffering under the current just as corrupt regime. An indication of the level of frustration of these very people would be the number of service delivery protests occurring in the country. More money could have been spent growing the economy instead of simply swopping out people in existing jobs which ultimately achieve nothing. The current U6 unemployment rate is sitting at 16.2 up from 11.8 in 1994, mostly young first time job seekers, at the end of June 2011, http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp?fromYear=1994
, the time bomb that the country is sitting on as pointed out by the government.
Another fact that you got wrong is that sexual crimes were up from 66,079 in 2003/2004 to 68,332 in 2009/2010
http://www.saps.gov.za/statistics/reports/crimestats/2010/totals.pdf
These Andrew are the facts regardless of what little spin you would like to
put on it.
I hope that this will help to put my earlier response into perspective.
Wessel
Wessel
To start with, let me point out that starting a post with, “Is this the best you can do,” is one of the most condescending things that I have ever been exposed to and, on that point alone, I decided to pursue this debate with vigor.
You are also absolutely correct about the picture. I chose it carefully for maximum impact because, without that, nobody would have read the blog post. That is identical to what magazines, newspapers and every blog on the Internet does every day. I make no apology and would do exactly the same thing again.
I also acknowledge your comments about the APRM report. I’m sorry to see that you continue to avoid mention of the overwhelmingly positive nature of the report, but your description of the red rating is perfectly accurate. I should say that I do not see all of these issues as a grave threat to democracy like you do. Some of them are minor bumps in the road. Unlike you, I’m not hoping for a change of government any time soon so perhaps our perspectives are different. At any rate, I feel that the APRM has seen enough debate. We both know what it says, we interpret it the same way, and one of us sees the glass as half empty while the other sees it as half full.
Unfortunately, I cannot similarly gloss over the message you have attributed to me, quite inaccurately, about crime stats.
Of course I find 16 834 murders per year to be unacceptable. I even find 1314 murders per year to be unacceptable. Do you see where I got that figure from? In 2009/2010, 1314 fewer people were murdered than in the previous reporting period. That represents a very large room packed with people that are still alive, and I very much doubt that they are there because the murderers slowed down.
I do not assert that everything in South Africa is perfect and I never have. All I am saying is that the picture of doom and gloom that you have painted is not accurate either. None of the issues that South Africa faces can be solved overnight, or in a single year. There is clear evidence that the government is making slow and steady progress in addressing most of these problems. What more do you want from them? Do you really believe that the DA, or some other political party, can clap their hands and make the crime rate disappear?
For the record, I never got anything wrong about the sexual crime statistics. I compared the most recent statistic to that of the previous year, not to 2003/2004.
We need to talk seriously about the story you posted from South Africa Web. In no way is that “a report from the South African government.” It was submitted by someone called Lana, and is posted in the “Government” section of a private Web site. If you read the article, it turns out that the only new hard statistic in it is provided by the Beeld. I mean, seriously – the last time the Beeld spoke for the government, I was watching the mailbox for call-up papers for military service.
This is getting embarrassing for me, but the unemployment rates you posted are for the USA, not for South Africa. According to Index Mundi, South Africa’s unemployment rate is much higher than the one you quoted, at 23.3%. That figure is down a massive 37% from the peak unemployment rate of 37% in 2003. (Yes, those figures are correct.) It looks to me as though the government is spending money on growing the economy quite well.
So, Wessel, everything that you have thrown at me has turned out to substantiate my original position that the government is doing a pretty good job, but not a perfect job. All it took is a little bit of reading to figure out what reports mean, and where they actually come from. This phenomenon – the hysterical and unfounded belief among white South Africans that the government is breaking everything – is what inspired me to write the post in the first place.
I agree completely with Comrade Blade Nzimande’s recent comment that earned him censure in parliament: “If the matric results are bad, this is taken as proof that this government of ‘darkies’ is incapable. If the matric pass rate goes up, it means the results have been manipulated by these ‘darkies’.” His comment won him a round of applause from the House, before a DA MP took exception to his use of the word “darkies” and the truth of his statement was steamrolled by a wave of unnecessary, emotional debate.
That is the true tragedy of our country. For reasons that I believe are rooted in racism, a great many white South Africans want our government to fail. When the government persistently affronts them by not failing, they suppress or twist the truth, drown it out with noise, mislead, and even tell blatant lies to hide the facts.
I don’t think you are one of these people, Wessel, but I do think you need to check your facts more carefully before you sound off, or just believe things.
Andrew
The US unemployment rate is indeed a worrying phenomenon – it’s all because of that defence budget I tell you…
I really enjoyed this post, Andrew (and the subsequent comments…). Combined with your thoughts On Tutu’s Whiteness Tax (http://www.andrew.co.za/2011/08/on-tutus-whiteness-tax.html), it provides a compelling argument for white people to become more involved by means of engaging with our unemployed and our poor and finding solutions. One can even find this appeal in Beeld (http://www.beeld.com/Rubrieke/Gasrubriekskrywers/Volkstaat-hou-gn-heil-in-20100112), for crying out loud.
The most appropriate response to Tutu’s comments within the context of the current realities of South Africa, is “Darn! Why didn’t we think of this first!? How do we go about setting up a huge, efficient and effective fund toward giving hope and results to the struggling masses quickly enough to be able to call it our own idea and therefore getting the bonus of goodwill?”
Rikus, my old friend! How excellent to find you online!
I’m not sure how such a fund could be established but, like Tutu, I feel strongly that it should be a social initiative rather than a governmental initiative. I just don’t think that Big Government works in a South African context. A lasting solution has to involve a grassroots awareness of, and attention to, the social requirements of different socio-economic groups without our immediate communities.
Another concern is the role of business in such an effort. I have seen too many social initiatives get transformed into promotional opportunities by the involvement of a major corporate sponsor. These initiatives come to depend on the sponsor, who then leaves the project once their have their pound of advertising. The initiatives then collapse, becoming unsustainable without the marketing budget of their sponsors. We would need to build a sustainable social commitment to the fund, independent of the precariousness of the current business and financial environments. Doing this involves looking past the ubiquitous capitalist financial models that involve usury and profiteering.
It was rather excellent to find your blog!
A good starting point for the solution might have to be to somehow prioritise identity and as a result channel our efforts into more inclusive hopes. For example, there seems to be an Afrikaner nationalism, that leans toward secessionist views about a solution to perceived or real hardship. The “Afrikaner” identity is here prioritised; if, instead, the “South African”, or “human” identity were prioritised, attention to the social requirements of different groups would be a natural consequence. In a way, Nelson Mandela once used rugby as a rallying call towards this. We need to give attention to which potential commonalities can build a sustainable shared identity that takes precedence over divisive rallying calls. (Afrikaner nationalism of course being only one example…)
Then it becomes easier to imagine effective social initiatives…
Your concern about the role of business reminds me of an RSA Animate by Slavoj Zizek – “First as Tragedy, Then as Farce” (http://youtu.be/hpAMbpQ8J7g).