The endemic culture of blame-shifting and victimhood

There exists a disturbing phenomenon in our country where no one person appears to be eager to assume responsibility for their individual deeds. The culture of blame shifting and victimhood is so deeply entrenched in the fibre of society that none of us appear willing to account for our individual actions, nor do we muster the courage to hold accountable those entrusted with positions of power. Government has mastered the art of blame-shifting; and it has become a commonly accepted norm to blame apartheid for apparent failures to discharge individual duties.

Recently, the new Jacob Zuma administration has made it their habit to blame the previous Thabo Mbeki administration for every problem under the sun. The question that arises is “when do those in power now begin to accept collective responsibility for all these problems facing the country, from corruption, violent crime, lack of service delivery, HIV/Aids pandemic, etc?”

The ANC has been in government since 1994; and if we are to proceed on the basis of the tradition entrenched within the ANC that decisions of the highest decision making body, the national executive committee, is binding on all its members, then all the resulting adverse consequences of such decisions should be put before those in the leadership at any particular point in time. The ANC prides itself with “collectivism” but that seemingly only applies to successes rather than failures. This was clearly demonstrated during the election campaign when the successes of the last 15 years were trumped up and owned by the Jacob Zuma and his band of cheerleaders; while the failures were all Mbeki’s fault.

Zuma along with a number of his Cabinet ministers have served in government in some capacity or another since 1994 and it is therefore puzzling that none of them want to take responsibility for failures of the Mandela and Mbeki administrations. The issue that everyone in government today appears to want to wash their filthy hands from is the manner in which the previous government is alleged to have approached the HIV/Aids issue.

The word “denialism” is bandied about by all and sundry as though the previous government had a particular policy of denying the orthodox view on HIV/Aids, when in fact government’s HIV/Aids policy was premised on that particular orthodox view that HIV causes Aids.

In 2006, the then deputy president, Ms Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, at Cosatu’s 9th National Congress said: “Since there is no cure for Aids we must act together to stop new infection by the HIV which causes Aids. We need to understand and tackle the factors that are helping make the impact of HIV and Aids so severe in Southern Africa. Socioeconomic factors; unequal gender relations that put women at risk; unprotected and unsafe sex; life style and stigma these and others play a part in the extent and severity of HIV infection across our society and region and the progression of its impact … comprehensive behaviour-change programmes that recognise and respond to the structural, social and individual drivers of HIV infection must therefore be the cornerstone of our prevention efforts.”

This view that was advanced by the then Deputy President Mlambo-Ngcuka was consistent with the view of the World Health Organisation (WHO) that extreme poverty was the world’s biggest killer. In its 1995 report, WHO said, “poverty is the underlying cause of reduced life expectancy, handicap, disability, starvation, mental illness, stress, suicide, family disintegration and substance abuse”. I am yet to hear WHO being accused of denialism. Perhaps that is yet to come.

In an interview with Time Magazine in 2000, Mbeki further stated that, “the notion that immune deficiency is only acquired from a single virus cannot be sustained … you cannot attribute immune deficiency solely and exclusively to a virus.”

It boggles the mind how seemingly intelligent commentators and journalists would have deduced from these comments that Mbeki was denying the link between HIV and Aids.

What I find more remarkable is that Zuma who served as head of the National Aids Council during the Mbeki administration and who was responsible for HIV/Aids policy, wants to exonerate himself to what many claim to have been genocidal in dealing with the HIV/Aids pandemic. The question we must ask Zuma when speaking on elevated podiums is, “what did you do then as deputy president and head of the National Aids Council when the former president allegedly promoted “denialism”? If Mbeki is indeed guilty of genocide (which is utter rubbish) as alleged by the brainless Young Communist League, then his entire Cabinet at the time is equally guilty of being accessory to genocide, including the current state president.

Nelson Mandela too cannot be exonerated from taking responsibility if we are to blame Mbeki for this pandemic and resultant deaths. It appears there is a deliberate attempt to shield this national icon from any warranted criticism; and rather perpetuate his saintly stature and deflect all blame to Mbeki. It was in October 1998 when Mbeki then deputy president and the then minister of health, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, put a stop to the health department’s piloting of antiretroviral treatment for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission, for a good reason. The person who was in charge of government at the time was Nelson Mandela. It is perplexing that the nonsensical study by the Harvard School of Public Health which claims Mbeki is responsible for over 300 000 does not mention Mandela once as the person who was ultimately accountable for actions of government in responding to HIV/Aids.

Mandela was president of the country and ultimately accountable for decisions of government; including that decision taken in 1998 to ignore the White Paper by Eskom on electricity, which recommended that power stations be built — given the projected limited capacity. When we reflect of the problems of that the country face today, it would be important to acknowledge that these problems were not born in 1999 when Mbeki ascended to the presidency.

To resort to populist grand posturings when addressing the problem of HIV/Aids is not going to be helpful. What is consistently missing from the discourse surrounding this pandemic is the question of individual responsibility. It does not suggest that government has no constitutional mandate to provide healthcare; but we cannot absolve individuals from their duty of care when engaging in pleasures of the flesh. In previous years government had engaged in a massive campaign to educate people about HIV/Aids.

I would personally find it difficult to believe there exists any individual out there who does not know what the preventative measures are against HIV/Aids infections. The promotion of abstinence and safe-sex has always been at the centre of government’s approach to dealing with this syndrome. No government official can be expected to be standing at every dark corner with condom in hand to assist adults to avoid contracting HIV. At what point to do we stop blaming government and start to put blame squarely on the shoulders of HIV patients?

This problem emerged again when the nation rose against the Reitz Four for allegedly humiliating workers at the University of the Free State. That actions of these four young boys were abhorrent cannot be contested; BUT the question that everyone appears to have forgotten to ask was “Why did these women allow themselves to be humiliated by boys young enough to be their sons?” It has not been reported anywhere that these women unwillingly participated in that widely distributed video.

When watching the video it appeared that these women were thoroughly enjoying themselves; only until someone leaked it to the media. It had not been reported that any of these women lodged a complaint immediately after the shooting of the video. Surely, while we all want to throttle the Reitz Four we must equally hold these women accountable. Some idiot wanted to equate their position to that of a rape victim; but one should not even compare their exploits to someone who has been violated against her will.

There is a saying that, “no one rain drop thinks it caused the flood”. This speaks directly to the issues of individual responsibility. Collectively if we are to proceed on the basis that “it wasn’t me”, the potential consequences of our actions may be adverse and extreme. Abdication and diffusion of responsibility are the primary impediment to progress we seek as a nation. It begins with us as individuals to accept our own responsibilities in order that we can and should earn the right to hold others, especially those we have entrusted with the responsibility of government, accountable for their actions.