Thursday, 29 January 2009

Back to Black . . .

Race is just about the most considered concept in the day to day lives of many South Africans. That is just the way things are. Well everytime I raise anything race based or related I am promptly told to get the chip off my shoulder and look to the future and forget the past because it is in the past. Well, the past is my present and as for the future - who knows?

My difficulty is that the country, its very existence and borders were built on race. The choices that people and corporations alike make on a daily basis, are informed to a lesser or greater extent by race. It is just the way it is. But it did not just become what it is today, it was made yesterday, in fact many, many yesterdays ago.

In the beginning there were only two races: the blacks (not allowed anything anywhere) and the whites (allowed everything everwhere). Nobody and nothing is ever going to fix that, ever! Who are the blacks though? It is clear who the whites are, but the blacks? That is a whole new proposition. In the good old days when things were fairly clear, black was all those who were not white, coloured or asian. Behind this was a whole series of legisltation, the police, the courts and around my town, practically all white people. Everyone was expected to know their place on the one or the other side of the divide.

This is a tired story I hear you say and it probably is. All I ask you to consider is the advent of black, when did it happen and how. My premise is simply this: black never was until white came and contrasted. This too is all too familiar. The classification of black as black and therefore different to white, was a clever instrument of division for the purpose of competition for resources. Politics, some white guy wrote, is nothing but competition and co-operation for resources. The more the resources get scarce, the more robust the politics (at best). The closer to white (a whole lot of criterea was used here from being converted to owning land, etc) you are meant the closer to the wealth of the land; of course the further from white the closer to animals and other chattels. Well that is not new either, but just bear with me. So too is the fact that this state of affairs was sustained over a long period of time, dehumanising and reducing to a state worse than animals, millions of people simply by classifying them black.

Today, the legislation, the police and some of the white people from my old neighbourhood are gone, well most of them. The classification has however stayed. Black remains the badge of poverty, degradation and all manner of social ills. There is of course a time when black was appropriated by black people who sought to make it positive and beautiful - sort of like nigger. The positiveness and beauty of black is however only so to black people, well some of them. Even with all these positive actions by positive people and organisations - black has remained just that, black - ok bleak if you insist. I now sort of understand why there are attempts to replace it with yet other classifications and distincitons. HDIs, PDGs, Equity candidates - black as a word seems to get stuck in the throats of white people, especially when black people are around. They don't want to be offensive you know. They know too well what it means, hell they came up with it. Yes, I am visiting the sins of the fathers on the children.

It is now generally accepted that all that classification and what came with it was wrong; in fact a crime against humanity; a crime no one is doing time for. We are all reconciled and have buried the past and have collectively said never, never, never again blah, blah, blah. It is not always easy to unravel theft at the best of time. To unravel theft perpetrated over as long a period as it has in this country comes very close to impossible, especially when fact is a substitute for the truth. The truth, Anton Harber (that brilliant journo) will tell you, is a much tougher proposition. He would know, he spent a long time trying to publish it. In some cases though, it is clear whose land it is and exactly when they were kicked off it to make way for white people. Then of course is the rule of law and just compensation and so on and so forth. In this instance I agree with the sentiment that criminals do indeed have more rights than victims.

The hard working white people have made good hay while the sun shone and of course should not now be robbed of their hay. It is now the turn of black people to make the same hay for themselves and their offspring. Anything else, will plunge this country into chaos just like the other countries in Africa. Just because this is sensible does not make it right, right? Uncle Trevor puts it so poetically when he says that sometimes we should be guided by the moral compas. How I wish that among all those GPS goodies at the cape union mart, they also sold moral compasses. Anyway, morality is just another inconvenient truth.

In the meantime, the new legislation says that black is a generic term that includes coloureds and indians. The corporations and companies are having a field day with the new classifications. They brandish their compliance certificates with pride. Now even companies have colour and it is black - there are actually black companies. I don't care much for companies and the individuals behind them. It is the communities that for me are the most important. Let us go out there and help communities to help themselves. It is the best insurance policy we can buy for our children. The black communities that the late Steve and his then comrade, friend and lover, Mamphele were demonised, harrassed, jailed (and Steve) killed for trying to build.

Then there are other laws that black people have to obey: do not vote for this party, do not eat or drink that, do not dress like that, do not speak english, do not play this music. It is not easy being a darkie I tell you. But I am not complaining and I'm not asking for pity from no one. I am just saying that I have been doing some reading and I'm onto the bullshit.

6 comments:

  1. An interesting post. There's a media theorist, Richard Dyer I think, who writes eloquently about "whiteness" and how it's presented as being right, pure, correct - think of how we describe black people sometimes as "non-white", implying that they can't be anything if they're not compared to white. Anyway, I'm rambling - if you're interested in those notions, check out Dyer's stuff.

    A few years ago a white friend of mine suggested that one of the reasons we're still so hamstrung by race in this country is that (most) white people have never apologised. Not in the "I'm terribly sorry that me and mine beat, tortured, oppressed, ridiculed and deprived you of all your basic rights", but in a "As a white person I gained materially from the apartheid regime and therefore I am now handing over 5% of my assets to a communal fund, and this money/land/these goods must be distributed among communities". In other words, reparations. What she's suggesting is that if every white South African had been forced (via legislation?) to hand over "x" amount of their goods, and those goods had been used to actively uplift previously disadvantaged communities, then we could really move on.

    What do you think of that notion? As a white South African who was absolutely certainly advantaged by her race, and continues to be so, I think it has merit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. VampyreJourno thanks for your comment. I hope the conversation will keep growing. I think the idea is a great one except for the notion of a fund which I suspect will then have to be controlled by government, in which case I think it will be resisted. I think white people, and there are lots who already do, should as with the women of the Black Sash, take on projects that will help communities regain their dignity. It is amazing what small non-aligned community groups can achieve. There should not be a set amount either and can be anything, from helping with school uniforms to helping with the plumbing of the school toilets. now I am rambling, but that is the nature of a conversations. Thanks you again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The key to what my friend was suggesting is that we should have struck while the iron was hot, so to speak. In other words, South Africa's white community should have acted decisively 14 years ago - and voting for the ANC was not a decisive enough act (also I suspect that most whites, those who weren't struggle veterans/card-carrying ANC members, probably voted for the then-DP.

    I have some fears that it's too late now to fix racial relations and imbalances, because we didn't really act to fix those things back in the idealistic post-1994 years. And YES, I agree that getting involved in community projects and so is is important and valuable, but I'm talking about fixing things on a grand scale.

    Am I just being a pessimist?

    ReplyDelete
  4. We can be late or we can be screwed - I would rather stay a virgin, how about you?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hahahahahahaa...I daresay it's too late for the latter. *ahem*

    I'm not suggesting that we do nothing - on the contrary, we've done so bloody little so far, if we do even less we're criminal.

    But I guess you've caught me on a grumpy day! :)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Forgive me using this post to answer the question you asked on my blog, but in short: I'm deleting that blog MAINLY because I don't have the time to maintain it (I have another personal blog, you can find it via Laura's blog).
    My concern about what is happening in my company is an issue, too - I cannot blog about that without potentially getting into trouble (for instance, blogger Llewelyn Kriel - I may have misspelled his name - lost his job at The Citizen after blogging about what was going on there on Thought Leader.co.za)
    However, I remain committed to debate and discussion - I'll just have to do it on your blog more often ;)

    ReplyDelete